2025-08-05 The Progressive Corporation (PGR) Q2 2025 Earnings Call Transcript
The Progressive Corporation (NYSE:PGR) Q2 2025 Earnings Conference Call August 5, 2025 9:30 AM ET
Company Participants
Bradley Granger - Corporate Participant
Douglas S. Constantine - Director of Investor Relations
Jen Kubit - Corporate Participant
John Peter Sauerland - VP & CFO
Patrick K. Callahan - President of Personal Lines
Susan Patricia Griffith - President, CEO & Director
Conference Call Participants
Charles Gregory Peters - Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Research Division
David Kenneth Motemaden - Evercore ISI Institutional Equities, Research Division
Elyse Beth Greenspan - Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, Research Division
Jamminder Singh Bhullar - JPMorgan Chase & Co, Research Division
Jian Huang - Morgan Stanley, Research Division
Joshua David Shanker - BofA Securities, Research Division
Katie Sakys - Unidentified Company
Michael David Zaremski - BMO Capital Markets Equity Research
Robert Cox - Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., Research Division
Douglas S. Constantine
Good morning and thank you for joining us today for Progressive's Second Quarter Investor Event. I am Doug Constantine, Director of Investor Relations and I will be moderator for today's event.
早上好，感谢大家今天参加 Progressive 第二季度投资者活动。我是 Doug Constantine，投资者关系总监，将担任今天活动的主持人。
The company will not make detailed comments related to its results in addition to those provided in its annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and the letter to shareholders, which have been posted to the company's website. This quarter includes a presentation on a specific portion of our business, followed by a question-and-answer session with members of our leadership team. Introductory comments in the presentation were previously recorded. Upon completion of the previously recorded remarks, we will use the balance of the 90 minutes scheduled for this event for live questions and answers with leaders featured in our recorded remarks as well as other members of our management team.
公司将不会对业绩进行除年度 Form 10-K 报告、季度 Form 10-Q 报告和股东信之外的详细评论，这些文件已发布在公司网站上。本季度的活动包括针对我们业务某一部分的专题演示，之后是与管理层成员的问答环节。演示中的开场发言已提前录制。录音播放结束后，我们将利用本次活动预定的 90 分钟剩余时间，与录音中出现的领导人以及管理团队其他成员进行现场问答。
As always, discussions in this event may include forward-looking statements. These statements are based on management's current expectations and are subject to many risks and uncertainties that could cause actual events and results to differ materially from those discussed during today's event. Additional information concerning those risks and uncertainties is available in our annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2024, as supplemented by our 10-Q reports for the first and second quarters of 2025, where you will find discussions of the risk factors affecting our businesses, safe harbor statements related to forward-looking statements and other discussions of the challenges we face. These documents can be found via the Investor Relations section of our website at investors.progressive.com. To begin today, I'm pleased to introduce our Personal Lines President, Pat Callahan, who will kick us off with some introductory comments. Pat?
一如既往，本次活动中的讨论可能包含前瞻性声明。这些声明基于管理层当前的预期，但受到许多风险和不确定性的影响，可能导致实际事件和结果与今天活动中讨论的内容有重大差异。有关这些风险和不确定性的更多信息，请参见我们截至 2024 年 12 月 31 日的年度 Form 10-K 报告，以及补充的 2025 年第一季度和第二季度 Form 10-Q 报告。在这些文件中，您将找到关于影响我们业务的风险因素、与前瞻性声明相关的安全港声明以及我们所面临挑战的讨论。这些文件可通过我们网站 investors.progressive.com 的投资者关系板块获取。今天的活动由我们的个人险业务总裁 Pat Callahan 开始，他将带来一些开场发言。Pat？
Patrick K. Callahan
Good morning and thank you for joining us today. Through the second quarter, 2025 continues to be one of our best years on record by all objective measures. We delivered strong profitability while simultaneously growing at an incredible pace, adding over \$5 billion in premiums written and nearly 2.4 million additional PIFs during the first half of 2025 compared to the first half of last year. We've previously said it's easy to grow an insurance company if you're not focused on underwriting profit and conversely, relatively easy to generate profit in insurance if you're not looking to grow. But simultaneously doing both, while operating in the highly competitive U.S. P\&C marketplace requires the rare combination of strategic focus and relentless execution that we consider key sources of Progressive's competitive advantage.
早上好，感谢大家今天加入我们。到第二季度为止，2025 年依然是我们历史上最出色的一年之一，且从各种客观指标来看都如此。我们在实现强劲盈利的同时，也保持着惊人的增长速度，与去年上半年相比，2025 年上半年新增承保保费超过 50 亿美元，新增保单数（PIFs）近 240 万份。我们曾经说过，如果不专注于承保利润，保险公司很容易实现增长；反过来，如果不追求增长，在保险业中相对容易实现利润。但在竞争激烈的美国财产与意外险市场中，同时做到这两点，则需要一种罕见的组合——战略专注与不懈执行，而我们认为这正是 Progressive 的核心竞争优势所在。
说的是GEICO。
Full statutory industry results released in June show that Progressive gained more than 1.5 points in personal auto market share in 2024 while outperforming the industry combined ratio by more than 7 points. Our 2024 market share increase was the largest share gain of any carrier in the past 15 years. This rare combination of profitable market share growth isn't an isolated event for Progressive. Over the past 15 years, we've increased our auto premium almost fivefold, while simultaneously running close to 9-point wider underwriting profit margins.
6 月公布的完整行业法定结果显示，Progressive 在 2024 年个人汽车保险市场份额中增加了超过 1.5 个百分点，同时综合赔付率表现领先行业 7 个百分点以上。我们在 2024 年的市场份额增幅是过去 15 年来所有保险公司中最大的一次。这种盈利性市场份额增长的罕见组合对 Progressive 来说并非孤立事件。在过去 15 年中，我们的汽车保费几乎增长了 5 倍，同时承保利润率扩大了近 9 个百分点。
Our performance is the direct result of executing against our 4 strategic pillars. People and culture, product breadth, brand and competitive prices. Today, we'll focus on competitive prices and provide you with some insights into how our ability to predict and price to future loss costs and to rapidly deploy products and pricing to match our premiums to our costs remain key ingredients of our continued success. The compounded effect of doing this with each successive product model has enabled us to continue to make great progress towards achieving our vision of becoming the #1 destination for consumers, agents and business owners for insurance and other financial needs.
我们的业绩直接得益于围绕四大战略支柱的执行：人才与文化、产品广度、品牌和具有竞争力的价格。今天，我们将重点放在具有竞争力的价格上，并向大家介绍我们如何凭借预测和定价未来损失成本的能力，以及快速部署产品与价格，使保费与成本保持匹配，从而继续取得成功。这种做法在每一代产品模型中的复合效应，使我们不断朝着愿景迈进，即成为消费者、代理人和企业主在保险及其他金融需求方面的首选平台。
可能导致碎片化的点。
Building on our exceptional underwriting profit performance, we continue to invest to drive continued growth. Despite seeing greater competition now than we did at the beginning of the year, through the second quarter, we continued to see strong demand for our personal auto products across both of our distribution channels. The independent agent channel is a great barometer for the competitive environment, where available coverage options across carriers are presented via comparative raters, which provide agents and their client's real-time comparisons of how our products compare to those offered by other carriers. Every indication is that our auto products have continued to outperform on a relative basis as evidenced by strong year-to-date double-digit growth in new applications, premiums written and policies in force.
在卓越的承保利润表现基础上，我们继续投资以推动持续增长。尽管现在面临的竞争比年初更为激烈，但到第二季度为止，我们的个人汽车产品在两个分销渠道中依然保持了强劲需求。独立代理渠道是竞争环境的重要晴雨表，在那里，不同保险公司的可选保障方案通过比较报价工具呈现，为代理人及其客户提供实时对比，显示我们的产品与其他公司产品的差异。各方面迹象表明，我们的汽车产品在相对意义上持续领先，这从年初至今新申请数、承保保费和在保单数的双位数强劲增长中得到了印证。
On the direct side, our marketing engine remains highly effective, generating high-quality prospects at near-record levels and our conversion rates indicate that despite the increasing marketing spend, our prices are still highly competitive and provide consumers a good value relative to other in-market options. Year-to-date, we have spent \$2.5 billion on marketing, an increase of about \$900 million compared to this time last year. And as our volume denominator grows, achieving year-over-year new application growth becomes more challenging. But so far, we have continued to leverage our scale in identifying new opportunities to refine where and how we invest our marketing spend to drive profitable growth.
在直销渠道方面，我们的营销引擎依然高效，产生的高质量潜在客户数量接近历史最高水平，而我们的转化率表明，尽管营销支出增加，我们的价格依然极具竞争力，并为消费者提供了相较其他市场选项更好的价值。今年迄今为止，我们在营销上的支出达到 25 亿美元，比去年同期增加约 9 亿美元。随着规模基数扩大，实现同比新申请增长变得更具挑战性。但到目前为止，我们仍在利用规模优势，不断挖掘新机会，优化营销支出的投向和方式，以推动盈利性增长。
Similar to Personal Lines, we continue to rapidly grow market share in our Commercial Lines business while consistently beating industry combined ratios by 8, 10 and as much as 20 points over the last 20 years. This consistent profitability is particularly impressive when looking at how U.S. commercial auto continues to struggle with profitability, producing its 14th consecutive unprofitable calendar year in 2024. Our success can be attributed in part to the intense focus on commercial auto as a core line of business in our Commercial Lines offering.
与个人险类似，我们在商业险业务中也持续快速提升市场份额，并在过去 20 年里稳定地超越行业综合赔付率 8 至 20 个百分点。这种持续盈利力尤为令人瞩目，特别是在美国商业车险仍持续面临盈利困境、到 2024 年已连续第 14 个日历年度亏损的背景下。我们的成功部分归功于将商业车险作为商业险业务的核心重点。
This auto focus, in conjunction with introducing the segmentation of commercial auto into business market targets more than 10 years ago, has enabled us to capitalize on meaningful and actionable differences between resulting vehicle types and usage that we can operationalize across all aspects of the business. This granular focus has allowed us to quickly develop segment-level insights and execute proactive rate and underwriting actions at the BMT level to deliver strong division level performance, as we did late last year when we adjusted rates and underwriting across BMTs to drive written premium growth across all our BMTs other than for-hire transportation. We're now extending those capabilities to our expansion product lines like the business owner policy product.
这种对汽车险的专注，再加上十多年前我们将商业车险细分为业务市场目标（BMT）的做法，使我们能够利用不同车辆类型和使用方式之间有意义且可操作的差异，并将其应用于业务的各个环节。这种精细化关注让我们能够迅速形成细分层面的洞察，并在 BMT 层面主动执行费率和承保措施，从而实现强劲的分部业绩表现。正如去年底我们在各 BMT 层面调整费率和承保，以推动除营运运输外所有 BMT 的承保保费增长。我们现在正将这些能力扩展到业务拓展产品线上，比如企业主保单产品。
To support long-term positive contributions from these newer businesses, we leverage established pricing and product delivery capabilities to ensure we have the necessary monitoring and insights in addition to leading capacity and the delivery agility to bring rapid rate and underwriting adjustments to market. Leveraging these proven capabilities should help our expansion commercial businesses deliver the profitable growth we expect from all of our underwriting businesses. A significant contributor to delivering our continued profitable growth is the ability to quickly and decisively respond to changes in loss costs to ensure we can remain open for business when inflationary pressures create hard markets and elevated shopping levels. This is no small feat, especially given the lack of historical precedent for some of the drivers of recent loss cost increases. Fast forward to today and we're similarly working to model first, second and third order effects of global tariffs and potential supply chain disruptions to determine the appropriate future rate levels for these emerging macroeconomic events.
为了支持这些新兴业务的长期正向贡献，我们利用既有的定价和产品交付能力，确保具备必要的监测与洞察，以及领先的产能和交付灵活性，从而能快速将费率与承保调整推向市场。利用这些经过验证的能力，应有助于我们的扩展型商业险业务实现我们对所有承保业务的盈利增长预期。我们能持续实现盈利增长的一个重要因素是能够快速而果断地应对损失成本的变化，从而确保在通胀压力造成硬性市场和购物需求高涨时，仍能保持业务开放。这绝非易事，尤其考虑到一些近期损失成本上升的驱动因素缺乏历史先例。放到当下，我们也正在努力模拟全球关税和潜在供应链中断的一级、二级和三级效应，以确定应对这些新兴宏观经济事件的未来适当费率水平。
Our pricing teams are responsible for translating highly complex and dynamic internal and external data into timely rate level recommendations. Each of our product teams are supported by a group of these talented individuals who leverage complex actuarial methods to understand and trend our future costs towards our goal of collecting the right premium to cover both the costs we'll incur and our target profit margin. Today, we'll be diving into the details of our personal and commercial lines pricing theory and practices. To guide us through this, we have 2 senior pricing leaders with us. First, Brad Granger, who has been our national auto pricing leader for the past 17 years and who will be celebrating his 25th Progressive anniversary later this month, will discuss some of the technical theories behind our pricing methodology. Following Brad, Jen Kubit, who has been with Progressive for 21 years and recently took on the leadership of our Commercial Lines pricing organization, will explain how these theories are applied in practice at Progressive. Once again, thank you for joining us today.
我们的定价团队负责将高度复杂且动态的内外部数据转化为及时的费率水平建议。每个产品团队都有一组才华横溢的专家支持，他们利用复杂的精算方法来理解和预测未来成本趋势，以实现收取合理保费，既覆盖我们将承担的成本，又实现目标利润率的目标。今天，我们将深入探讨个人险与商业险的定价理论与实践。为此，我们邀请了两位高级定价负责人。首先是 Brad Granger，他在过去 17 年里一直担任全国汽车险定价负责人，本月晚些时候将迎来加入 Progressive 的 25 周年纪念，他将介绍我们定价方法背后的部分技术理论。随后是 Jen Kubit，她已在 Progressive 工作 21 年，最近接任商业险定价部门的领导工作，她将讲解这些理论在 Progressive 的实际应用。再次感谢大家今天的到来。
I'll now turn it over to Brad. Brad?
现在交给 Brad。Brad？
Bradley Granger
Thanks, Pat and thank you, everyone, for joining this morning. What is our product? A property and casualty insurance companies such as Progressive doesn't actually manufacture a physical product. Our product is not tangible. Instead, it is a transfer of risk from insured to insurer, exchanging the small probability of an adverse financial event in exchange for the payment of a premium. That transfer of risk is outlined in our policy contract. And that transfer of risk is both dependent on when accidents occur or the accident date and time bound within our short-term contract lengths of 6 or 12 months.
谢谢你，Pat，也感谢各位今天上午的参与。我们的产品是什么？像 Progressive 这样的财产与意外险公司并不真正制造实物产品。我们的产品是无形的，它实际上是一种风险转移：被保险人将发生不利财务事件的小概率风险转移给保险公司，以支付保费作为交换。这种风险转移在我们的保险合同中有明确规定。而且，这种风险转移既取决于事故发生的时间和日期，也受限于我们 6 个月或 12 个月的短期合同期限。
Car accidents are not corn flakes as opposed to a tangible product like corn flakes, where costs are largely known before the product is priced and sold, Progressive doesn't know for sure what our costs are until long after our product is priced and sold. That is precisely the transfer of risk from insured to insurer I just described only now from the perspective of the insurer, that risk is now ours. And as we will discuss in a few minutes, we do many things to mitigate that risk within both our pricing science and our operationalization of getting the right rate to market quickly.
车祸不同于玉米片。像玉米片这样的有形产品，在定价和销售之前成本基本是已知的，而 Progressive 在产品定价和销售之后很久，才真正知道我们的成本是多少。这正是我刚才所描述的从被保险人向保险公司转移风险的过程，只不过现在从保险公司的角度看，这些风险就成了我们的风险。正如我们稍后将讨论的那样，我们通过定价科学和快速将合适费率推向市场的运营手段，采取了许多措施来缓释这种风险。
Pricing to expected cost. First, when we talk about pricing for costs, we were referring to all parts of our premium dollar, losses, loss adjustment expenses, or LAE, general expenses and profit. According to the Casualty Actuarial Society statement of principles on ratemaking, "a rate is reasonable and not excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory. If it is an actuarially sound estimate of the expected value of all future costs associated with an individual risk transfer."
基于预期成本的定价。首先，当我们谈到成本定价时，指的是保费收入的所有组成部分：赔付、损失调整费用（LAE）、一般费用和利润。根据 Casualty Actuarial Society 关于费率制定的原则声明，“如果一个费率是对与个体风险转移相关的所有未来成本的预期值的精算合理估计，那么该费率就是合理的，并且既不过高、也不不足，也不是不公平歧视性的。”
A few things to highlight there. First, it references expected value of future costs where actual outcomes could be lower or higher. Second, it is always forward-looking or prospective as it is an estimate of future costs. Third, today's presentation will focus primarily on not excessive and not inadequate as opposed to not unfairly discriminatory, which is largely in the domain of our product development departments. This is analogous to the field of economics and the distinction between macroeconomics and the focus on changes in whole economies and aggregate variables and microeconomics and the focus on changes in individual firms and consumers.
这里有几点需要强调。第一，它提到的是未来成本的预期值，实际结果可能高于或低于预期。第二，它始终是前瞻性的，因为它是对未来成本的估计。第三，今天的演讲主要关注“不过高”和“不不足”，而不是“不公平歧视”，后者主要属于我们产品开发部门的领域。这类似于经济学中的区分：宏观经济学关注整体经济和总量变量的变化，而微观经济学则关注个体企业和消费者的变化。
We will focus today on macro level pricing as opposed to the individual relative risk rating and segmentation of micro level pricing. And in addition to our approach being aligned with actuarial principles, it is also well aligned with state regulation as nearly all states legally require that rates are not excessive, not inadequate and not unfairly discriminatory. And it also fits quite well within Progressive's vision to be consumers' #1 choice via competitive rates. But to do so by growing profitably and adhering to our core value of profit.
今天我们将专注于宏观层面的定价，而不是微观层面上个体相对风险评级和细分的定价。除了与精算原则保持一致，我们的方法也与州监管高度契合，因为几乎所有州的法律都要求费率不过高、不不足、不具有不公平歧视性。同时，这也很好地符合 Progressive 的愿景，即通过具有竞争力的费率成为消费者的首选，但要以盈利增长和坚持我们的核心价值——利润——作为前提。
The fundamental pricing questions. There are two questions that completely underlie our approach. #1, if we don't do anything to current rates, what loss plus LAE ratio should we expect in the upcoming rate revision for the policies we are about to write. And #2, what do we need to do to current rates in order to hit our combined ratio target in the upcoming rate revision for policies we are about to write. We refer to these as the fundamental pricing questions. And in the coming slides, we will build the fundamental pricing equation to answer these questions.
基本定价问题。我们的定价方法完全建立在两个问题之上。第一，如果我们不对当前费率进行任何调整，那么在即将进行的费率修订中，对于我们即将签发的保单，应预期怎样的赔付加 LAE 比例？第二，为了在即将进行的费率修订中实现我们的综合赔付率目标，我们需要对当前费率做出哪些调整？我们称之为基本定价问题。在接下来的部分中，我们将构建基本定价公式来回答这些问题。
Actuaries develop predictions that minimize bias and variance. An enormous competitive advantage that Progressive has is the quality, granularity and quick availability of data. Our growth and scale have only deepened that advantage. But if you don't think you have a blind spot, then you have a blind spot. And with all of this quality data, if we are not careful, we could slice the cake and slice the cake and slice the cake until all we have are crumbs. This is where we, in our pricing organizations, come in. Actuaries are experts in matching rate to risk, balancing responsiveness and stability and maximizing accuracy and precision. And as we will see in the coming slides, as we try to price this accident year promise, our data is trying to fool us. There is no single perfect piece of data.
精算师在预测中努力最小化偏差和方差。Progressive 的巨大竞争优势在于其数据的质量、细致程度和快速可用性。我们的增长和规模进一步加深了这一优势。但如果你认为自己没有盲点，那其实就是最大的盲点。即便有如此高质量的数据，如果我们不加小心，就可能把蛋糕切啊切，直到只剩下碎屑。这就是我们定价团队的职责所在。精算师是将费率与风险匹配的专家，他们在响应性与稳定性之间寻求平衡，并最大化准确性和精确度。而正如我们将在接下来的内容中看到的，当我们尝试为这个事故年度承诺定价时，数据可能会“愚弄”我们。不存在单一完美的数据。
数据质量也是AI的关键，无论是训练模型还是使用模型，高质量数据又跟管理能力有关。
Our work centers around correcting for bias or for accuracy and spread and variance or precision and finding signal through noise. And bias, as used here refers to statistical bias. From Wikipedia, "in the field of statistics, bias is a systematic tendency in which the methods used to gather data and estimate a sample statistic present an inaccurate, skewed or distorted biased depiction of reality". Every month, Progressive releases financial information publicly describing our underwriting performance by line of business. To align with generally accepted accounting principles, this is predominantly a calendar year or month view that includes incurred activity on all losses and LAE regardless of date of occurrence. For the purposes of ratemaking, however, we are attempting to price for the accident year, that is ensuring that we have the correct rates at the time the accidents occur which I'll explain further in the next few slides.
我们的工作主要集中在修正偏差以提高准确性，以及控制分散性和方差以提升精确性，并在噪音中寻找信号。这里所说的偏差是指统计偏差。根据 Wikipedia 的定义，“在统计学中，偏差是一种系统性倾向，即数据收集和样本统计估计的方法对现实给出不准确、偏斜或失真的描述。” Progressive 每月都会公开发布财务信息，描述我们按业务线划分的承保表现。为了符合公认会计原则（GAAP），这些信息主要以日历年或日历月为视角，涵盖所有损失和 LAE 的发生活动，而不论其发生日期。然而，在费率制定中，我们试图针对事故年度来定价，也就是说，要确保在事故发生时我们有正确的费率，我将在接下来的部分进一步解释。
Calendar year incurred losses are a combination of paid losses and change in reserves. They can also be subdivided to show contribution to that calendar year of current accident year versus all prior accident years. We will now use a historical example derived from a Progressive personal auto state comprehensive coverage to demonstrate how we can effectively answer the fundamental pricing questions. All amounts are in thousands of dollars. The first piece of data we readily have is trailing 12 calendar year incurred losses of \$43.24 million.
日历年发生损失由已支付损失和准备金变动构成。它们还可以进一步细分，显示当年事故年度与所有前期事故年度对该日历年的贡献。我们现在将使用一个来自 Progressive 个人车险州综合险的历史案例，来展示我们如何有效地回答基本定价问题。所有金额单位为千美元。我们首先掌握的数据是最近 12 个月的日历年发生损失，总计 4324 万美元。
As we just stated, calendar year incurred losses can also be subdivided to show contribution of current accident year versus all prior accident years, as can be seen here as we see the same paid loss plus change in reserves pattern for both the current accident year and all prior accident years. We will now use our simple example to fill in values for each element of the formulas. And in this example, when we isolate the contribution of this accident year, to the current calendar year incurred losses of \$43.24 million, we see that the current accident year incurred losses are \$43.56 million.
正如我们刚才所说，日历年发生损失可以细分，显示当前事故年度与所有前期事故年度的贡献。这里我们看到当前事故年度和所有前期事故年度的已支付损失加准备金变动呈现出相同的模式。接下来我们用这个简单的例子来为公式的各个要素填值。在本例中，当我们将本事故年度的贡献从 4324 万美元的日历年发生损失中分离出来时，我们得到当前事故年度发生损失为 4356 万美元。
The other element of calendar year incurred losses is the contribution of prior accident years, also known as prior accident year runoff, which in this case, is negative \$327,000. The \$43.56 million current accident year losses is what we need to start to answer the fundamental pricing questions. Unbiased ultimate accident year losses equal accident year incurred losses times loss development factor. Loss reservings' goal is to set financial reserves to be adequate with minimal variation from date of loss until final settlement. We examine the development over time of historical accident year losses as claims are reported and settled across the columns of the loss development triangle, as can be seen in the upper right. That is known as a loss development factor. In this case, the reserves set by claims and loss reserving have historically been accurate. In our example, that loss development factor is then slightly less than 1, at 0.99.
日历年发生损失的另一部分是前期事故年度的贡献，也称为前期事故年度消耗，在本例中为 -32.7 万美元。4356 万美元的当前事故年度损失是我们开始回答基本定价问题所需的数据。无偏最终事故年度损失等于事故年度发生损失乘以损失发展因子。损失准备金的目标是设置足够的财务准备金，并尽量减少从损失发生到最终结清期间的波动。我们研究历史事故年度损失随时间的演变过程，这些损失随着理赔的报告和结清，在损失发展三角的各列中逐步体现出来，如右上角所示。这就是所谓的损失发展因子。在本例中，理赔与损失准备设定的准备金历来准确。在我们的例子里，该损失发展因子略低于 1，为 0.99。
At this point, we can also bring in another piece of data that we readily have, trailing 12 calendar year earned premium of \$61.14 million. Loss adjustment expenses are correlated with losses. Loss adjustment expenses can be divided into Defense and Cost Containment or DCC, which is defense, litigation and medical cost containment expenses, whether internal costs or external fees and Adjusting and Other or A\&O, which is adjusting and other overhead expenses, whether internal costs or external fees. Both can change in the short term and long term depending on a number of factors, including attorney representation rate, statutory and regulatory changes, changes in efficiency in our claims organization among other possible causes but in general, tend to move with losses.
此时，我们还可以引入另一个容易获取的数据，即最近 12 个月的日历年已赚保费，总计 6114 万美元。损失调整费用与损失相关。损失调整费用可以分为两类：防御与成本控制（DCC），包括辩护、诉讼和医疗成本控制费用，无论是内部成本还是外部费用；以及调整与其他（A\&O），包括理赔调整和其他管理费用，无论是内部成本还是外部费用。这两类费用在短期和长期都可能因多种因素而变化，包括律师代理率、法律法规变动、理赔组织效率的变化等，但总体上往往随损失变动。
In this example, we have selected LAE to be 12% of losses. A portion of our costs are mean reverting. Forecasting elements of the fundamental pricing equation deals with 2 distinct forms of time series. First, time series with stationarity, the graph on the left. This series tends to revert to a historical mean and requires a longer experience period to provide an effective future forecast. Weather is a prime example of where this approach is warranted. Care must be taken to decide whether such historical mean needs to be slightly adjusted going forward due to environmental changes in our future pricing period. Time series without stationarity, the graph on the right. That series does not revert to a historical mean. It is dominated by trend and seasonality. We will discuss this further when we examine frequency trend, severity trend and premium trend.
在本例中，我们假设 LAE 占损失的 12%。我们的一部分成本是均值回归型。基本定价公式中的预测要素涉及两种不同形式的时间序列。第一种是平稳时间序列，如左图所示。这类序列倾向于回归历史均值，需要更长的经验期来提供有效的未来预测。天气就是这种方法适用的典型例子。但要谨慎决定未来定价期内，是否因环境变化而对该历史均值进行轻微调整。第二种是非平稳时间序列，如右图所示。这类序列不会回归历史均值，而是受趋势和季节性主导。在我们讨论频率趋势、严重性趋势和保费趋势时，将进一步探讨这一点。
In this example, the last year contained \$14 million of wind, flood, hail losses, well above our long-term expected average. Therefore, restating the long-term expectation implies a weather factor of 0.926. For Commercial Lines, an additional area where we must consider this paradigm of reversion to the mean is in treatment of large losses. As with weather, care must be taken to decide whether such historical mean needs to be slightly adjusted going forward due to environmental changes in our future pricing period. Frequency and severity of losses change over time. What changes each over time? Essentially, this is time as a segmentation variable. It helps to separate the multiplicative components of losses as the drivers of each can be different. Frequency is the probability of having a claim, severity is the dollar amount of the claim itself. Factors that can affect frequency include vehicle technology, safety laws, product mix, for example deductibles or tier, statements, new business growth, retention, weather, seasonality, underwriting and billing.
在本例中，去年包含了 1400 万美元的风灾、洪水和冰雹损失，远高于我们长期预期的平均水平。因此，重新陈述长期预期意味着天气因子为 0.926。对于商业险，我们还必须在处理巨额损失时考虑这种均值回归的范式。与天气一样，需要谨慎决定未来定价期间是否应对该历史均值进行轻微调整，因为环境变化可能会产生影响。损失的频率和严重性会随着时间而变化。那么随着时间变化的究竟是什么？实质上，时间就是一种细分变量。它有助于将损失的乘法成分分开，因为驱动因素可能不同。频率是发生理赔的概率，严重性是单次理赔的金额。可能影响频率的因素包括车辆技术、安全法律、产品组合（例如免赔额或层级）、声明、新业务增长、保单留存、天气、季节性、承保和账单。
Apart from the magnitude of the trend itself, the number of months that we need to trend is important, too. That is a function of time to price, file, get approval and elevate, policy term and rate revision length. Remember the bull's-eye slide from earlier? The precision of our estimates declines, meaning we have a greater spread, the further into the future we have to estimate. That is a particular importance in commercial auto as they have a preponderance of annual policies which increases the number of months into the future we must trend.
除了趋势本身的幅度外，我们需要外推的月份数也很重要。这取决于定价、报备、获批和提升所需的时间，以及保单期限和费率修订周期。还记得之前的靶心幻灯片吗？我们的估计精度会下降，也就是说，估计的未来越远，不确定性范围就越大。这在商业车险中特别重要，因为其保单以年度为主，导致我们必须外推的月份数增加。
In our example, we have estimated frequency trend to be plus 1% annually. That needs to be applied for approximately 16 months from the midpoint of the historic period to the future average accident date of our prospective pricing period. The faster we can analyze our data, the shorter we can make our policy terms and the more frequently we can elevate rate revisions, the fewer months we need to trend and the more we can reduce spread of outcomes and increase precision in our forecasts. The process is similar for severity. Factors that can affect severity include vehicle technology, safety laws, product mix, for example, limits, state mix, medical inflation, used car values, car part inflation, body shop labor rates, weather, seasonality, claims staffing.
在本例中，我们估算的频率趋势为每年 +1%。这一趋势需要应用大约 16 个月，从历史时期的中点推算到未来定价期的平均事故日期。我们分析数据的速度越快，就能将保单期限缩短得越多，提升费率修订的频率，从而减少需要外推的月份数，缩小结果分布范围，提高预测精度。严重性的处理过程类似。影响严重性的因素包括车辆技术、安全法律、产品组合（例如限额、州别组合）、医疗通胀、二手车价值、汽车零件通胀、修理厂人工费、天气、季节性、理赔人员配备等。
In our example, we have estimated severity trend to be plus 7% annually. As with frequency trend, that needs to be applied for approximately 16 months from the midpoint of the historic period to the future average accident date of our prospective pricing period. The further into the future, we have to estimate the wider the spread of future possible outcomes. Progressive changes rates frequently. Remember, the fundamental pricing equation is working towards answering the fundamental pricing question of determining what we need to do to current rates. Progressive changes rates a lot. Consequently, any recent historical period of earned premium will include premium written at varying rate levels. This phenomenon is further exacerbated by the presence of varying policy terms, 6 months and 12 months. So we need to adjust this historical premium entirely to today's current rate level. In our example, we have elevated 2 rate decreases in the last year. That means our current rate level factor is 0.958.
在本例中，我们估算的严重性趋势为每年 +7%。与频率趋势一样，这需要应用大约 16 个月，从历史时期的中点推算到未来定价期的平均事故日期。我们推算的未来越远，潜在结果的分布范围就越宽。Progressive 经常调整费率。记住，基本定价公式的目标就是回答基本定价问题，即确定我们需要对当前费率采取什么措施。Progressive 调整费率频繁，因此任何近期的历史已赚保费期间都包含在不同费率水平下签发的保费。这种现象因存在 6 个月和 12 个月不等的保单期限而进一步加剧。因此，我们需要将这段历史保费完全调整到当今的现行费率水平。在本例中，我们在去年提升了两次费率下调。这意味着我们的现行费率水平因子为 0.958。
Controlling for the effect of product mix shifts on loss trend. A frequency or severity trend that is caused by a product mix shift will not necessarily mean our rate adequacy position, as seen by our fundamental pricing equation will shift. For example, Progressive has been shifting to Robinsons for several years. In isolation, what would we expect to happen to frequency and severity of losses? Frequency would decrease significantly due to more lower-risk drivers in our book. Severity would increase for liability coverages due to higher purchased limits of liability. Overall, losses per exposure would decrease as the frequency decline would overwhelm the severity increase. But we would also be collecting less premium per exposure as we charge less for Robinsons per exposure.
控制产品组合变化对损失趋势的影响。由于产品组合变化引起的频率或严重性趋势，并不一定意味着根据我们的基本定价公式，费率充足性会发生变化。例如，Progressive 多年来一直在向 Robinsons 转移。单独来看，我们预期损失的频率和严重性会发生什么变化？由于我们账簿中低风险驾驶员增多，频率会显著下降。由于购买的责任险限额更高，严重性会在责任险中上升。总体来看，每个风险单位的损失会下降，因为频率下降将压倒严重性上升的影响。但我们每个风险单位收取的保费也会减少，因为我们对 Robinsons 每个风险单位收取的费用较低。
We control for the effect of product mix shifts on our frequency and severity via premium trend which measures changes in average earned premium at current rate level over time. We must put all premium at a common rate level as only looking at changes in average earned premium over time would be confounded by Progressive's frequent rate changes. The graphs of bodily injury earned premium on this slide illustrate this. While Progressive's average earned premium per exposure has increased due to our rate increases in recent years, the average earned premium per exposure when controlling for that, i.e., at current rate level has declined. The net effect of the rate increases and product mix shift is still to have increasing bodily injury average earned premium per exposure. And therefore, a product mix shift will not necessarily mean our rate adequacy position would shift. It would only change if we are shifting into a part of our book that has a different relative level of profitability.
我们通过保费趋势来控制产品组合变化对频率和严重性的影响。保费趋势衡量的是在现行费率水平下，平均已赚保费随时间的变化。我们必须将所有保费置于统一的现行费率水平下，否则仅仅观察平均已赚保费随时间的变化，会因 Progressive 频繁的费率变动而产生混淆。本页幻灯片中的人身伤害已赚保费图表就说明了这一点。尽管近年来由于费率上调，Progressive 的每风险单位平均已赚保费有所增加，但在控制费率因素后，即按现行费率水平计算，每风险单位的平均已赚保费却下降了。费率上调与产品组合变化的净效应仍然是人身伤害每风险单位平均已赚保费的上升。因此，产品组合变化不一定意味着我们的费率充足性会发生变化，除非我们转向账簿中相对盈利水平不同的部分。
If we are shifting into a part of our book that is less profitable, the rate need, as indicated by the fundamental pricing equation would go up as frequency/severity would rise more than premium, and we would need more rate. If we are shifting into a part of our book that is more profitable, the rate need, as indicated by the fundamental pricing equation would go down as frequency/severity would rise less than premium and we would need less rate.
如果我们转向账簿中盈利性较低的部分，根据基本定价公式，费率需求将会上升，因为频率/严重性增长超过了保费，我们就需要更高的费率。如果我们转向盈利性较高的部分，根据基本定价公式，费率需求将会下降，因为频率/严重性增长低于保费，我们就需要更低的费率。
In our example here, in contrast to the graphs of Progressive bodily injury, annual premium trend is actually positive at plus 5%. And like frequency and severity trend, that needs to be applied for approximately 16 months from the midpoint of the historic period to the future average accident date of our prospective pricing period.
在我们的示例中，与 Progressive 的人身伤害图表相反，年度保费趋势实际上为正，即 +5%。与频率和严重性趋势一样，这一趋势需要应用大约 16 个月，从历史时期的中点推算到未来定价期的平均事故日期。
What target loss plus LAE ratio would meet our underwriting profit target? First, we determine a forward-looking estimate of expense ratio. Second, we work backwards to determine our target loss ratio, which is equal to 1, minus the expense ratio minus profit. In our example, expense ratio is 17.7% of premium, together with our profit target of 4%, our budgetary loss plus LAE ratio is 78.3%. Some elements are correlated. While we have detailed the elements of the fundamental pricing equation individually, we do not assume the correlations do not exist between elements. Some examples are losses and LAE, premium trend or product mix and frequency trend, premium trend or product mix and severity trend, LAE and severity trend, loss development factors and severity trend, premium trend or product mix and expenses via the budgetary loss and loss adjustment expense ratio. Understanding these patterns can inform our predictions of each element and improve accuracy and precision of the fundamental pricing equation.
什么样的目标损失加 LAE 比率可以满足我们的承保利润目标？首先，我们要确定费用率的前瞻性估计。其次，我们倒推计算目标赔付率，即 1 减去费用率和利润。在本例中，费用率为保费的 17.7%，加上 4% 的利润目标，我们的预算性损失加 LAE 比率为 78.3%。一些要素之间是相关的。虽然我们单独列出了基本定价公式的要素，但我们并不假设它们之间不存在相关性。例如，损失与 LAE、保费趋势或产品组合与频率趋势、保费趋势或产品组合与严重性趋势、LAE 与严重性趋势、损失发展因子与严重性趋势、以及保费趋势或产品组合与通过预算损失和损失调整费用率反映的费用等。理解这些模式有助于我们对各个要素的预测，并提高基本定价公式的准确性和精确性。
Balancing responsiveness with stability. Remember the bull's-eye diagram from earlier, we always seek truth but observe data which is truth plus random noise. Credibility, also known as the crown jewel of casualty actuarial science helps us ultimately deliver the best minimum variance unbiased estimate or as close to the bull's-eye pattern in the lower right-hand corner as possible and allows us to slice the cake optimally to balance responsiveness and stability and achieve forecasts that minimize both bias and variance. We want to emphasize recent data such that random noise is kept to an acceptable level. And we want to emphasize that recent data because it is closest to what we can expect in our future pricing period in terms of our book of business and the external environment. But there can be a trade-off there as that data can be thinner and noisier and we need to make adjustments to account for that noise.
在响应性与稳定性之间取得平衡。还记得之前的靶心图吗？我们始终追求真相，但我们观察到的数据是真相加上随机噪音。可信度（Credibility），也被称为财产险精算科学的“皇冠上的明珠”，帮助我们最终提供最佳的最小方差无偏估计，或尽可能接近右下角的靶心模式，并使我们能够在切分数据时做到最优，在响应性与稳定性之间取得平衡，从而实现既最小化偏差又最小化方差的预测。我们希望强调近期数据，以便随机噪音保持在可接受的水平。同时我们希望强调近期数据，因为它最接近我们未来定价期在业务结构和外部环境中的预期。但这里可能存在权衡，因为这些数据可能样本较少、噪音更大，我们需要进行调整以应对这种噪音。
Credibility is a number between and including 0 and 1 that we use to weigh our data. The higher credibility is the more weight we attach to our data in the fundamental pricing equation. A sample of experience reaches full credibility, so credibility equals 1. If we have enough claims that 90% of the time our experience is within plus or minus 5% of the true value. That standard for full credibility for each coverage is determined through complex actuarial formulas and increases as the variability of experience increases.
可信度是介于 0 和 1 之间的数值，我们用它来衡量数据的权重。可信度越高，我们在基本定价公式中赋予数据的权重就越大。当一个经验样本达到完全可信度时，可信度等于 1。也就是说，如果我们有足够的理赔样本，使得 90% 的情况下经验结果在真实值的 ±5% 以内，就可以认为达到了完全可信度。每种险种达到完全可信度的标准是通过复杂的精算公式确定的，并且会随着经验变异性的增加而提高。
In our example, the standard for full credibility is 4,559 claims. We have over 27,000 claims in our experience period. So we have full credibility and credibility equals 1 or 100%. Our growth and scale has significantly enhanced our credibility and our ability to best react to changes in our environment. And in general, for personal auto, we have achieved that full credibility with 1 year of data in the overwhelming majority of our state channel coverage combinations.
在我们的例子中，达到完全可信度的标准是 4,559 个理赔。而我们的经验期中有超过 27,000 个理赔。因此我们达到了完全可信度，可信度等于 1 或 100%。我们的增长和规模显著提升了我们的可信度，以及我们最佳应对环境变化的能力。总体而言，在个人车险方面，我们在绝大多数州渠道的险种组合中，仅凭 1 年的数据就实现了完全可信度。
We now have developed the fundamental pricing equation where we can answer the first fundamental pricing question. If we don't do anything to current rates, what loss plus LAE ratio should we expect in the upcoming rate revision for the policies we are about to write. So that's our experience loss plus LAE ratio. We can also answer the second fundamental pricing question, what do we need to do to current rates in order to hit our combined ratio target in the upcoming rate revision for policies we are about to write. That's our experienced loss plus LAE ratio divided by our budgetary loss plus LAE ratio.
我们现在已经建立了基本定价公式，可以回答第一个基本定价问题：如果我们不对现行费率进行任何调整，在即将进行的费率修订中，对于我们即将签发的保单，应预期怎样的损失加 LAE 比率？这就是我们的经验性损失加 LAE 比率。我们还可以回答第二个基本定价问题：为了在即将进行的费率修订中实现综合赔付率目标，我们需要对现行费率做出哪些调整？这就是我们的经验性损失加 LAE 比率除以预算性损失加 LAE 比率。
And one final step is to weight our estimate with a complement via credibility. So the experienced loss plus LAE ratio divided by the budgetary loss plus LAE ratio times credibility plus a complement of credibility times 1 minus credibility. The complement is an alternate estimate of rate need apart from the fundamental pricing equation that augments the fundamental pricing equation with an estimate of future net trend. In our example, we used a complement of credibility of plus 2.4%.
最后一步是通过可信度加权我们的估计。即经验性损失加 LAE 比率除以预算性损失加 LAE 比率，再乘以可信度，加上可信度补充部分乘以 (1 - 可信度)。补充部分是一种不同于基本定价公式的费率需求估计，它为基本定价公式增加了对未来净趋势的估算。在我们的例子中，我们使用的可信度补充为 +2.4%。
The final product is what we refer to as a credibility weighted rate level indication. Here that is plus 1.3%. This concludes the theory of pricing. As you can see, it's complex with many variables and considerations and thus many ways to go astray. This is really, really hard to do successfully. We have been at this for decades, and combined with the availability, quality, scope and size of our data, it is really, really hard to replicate this at our scale. And to be as accurate and precise as possible when we apply this theory in practice, we have many additional considerations, which Jen Kubit will discuss in the next section. Jen?
最终结果就是我们所称的“可信度加权费率水平指示”。在这里结果为 +1.3%。这就结束了定价理论的部分。正如你所看到的，这一过程复杂，涉及许多变量和考量，因此很容易出错。要想成功做到这一点，极其困难。我们已经在这一领域深耕数十年，再加上我们数据的可得性、质量、范围和规模，使得在我们的规模上复制这一点极其困难。为了在实践中尽可能准确和精确地应用这一理论，我们还需考虑许多额外因素，接下来 Jen Kubit 将进行讲解。Jen？
涉及许多变量和考量，GEICO不愿意搞的这么复杂。
Jen Kubit
Thank you, Brad, for explaining the theory behind the calculations to the 2 fundamental pricing questions. If we don't do anything to current rates, what loss plus LAE ratio should we expect in the upcoming rate revision for the policies we are about to write? And what do we need to do to current rates in order to hit our combined ratio target in the upcoming rate revision for policies we are about to write? So now let's discuss how we answer these questions at Progressive and how the answers influence customers' rates and future profitability.
谢谢你，Brad，解释了关于两个基本定价问题的计算背后的理论。如果我们不对现行费率做任何调整，在即将进行的费率修订中，对于我们即将签发的保单，应预期怎样的损失加 LAE 比率？以及为了在即将进行的费率修订中实现综合赔付率目标，我们需要对现行费率做出哪些调整？现在让我们来讨论 Progressive 是如何回答这些问题的，以及这些答案如何影响客户的费率和未来的盈利能力。
This ratemaking process at Progressive slide was last shown in the 2021 Fourth Quarter Investor Relations call with John Curtiss and Kanik Varma. This process is utilized in all our lines of business at Progressive. The product R\&D, pricing and product management teams collaborate to determine the rate need to support our operational goal, grow as fast as you can at or below a 96 combined ratio. Additional teams join these 3 to deploy the final rate changes to the marketplace. Once deployed, a consumer's quoted premium reflects the revised rates. Let's focus in on the 3 teams that collaborate to determine our rate need. There are 2 broad areas of rate need, segment level and aggregate rate. In this presentation, Brad went in depth into the best actuarial science we use in pricing to evaluate the aggregate rate need in the future revision to hit the target of budgetary loss and LAE ratio.
Progressive 的费率制定流程幻灯片上一次展示是在 2021 年第四季度投资者关系电话会议上，由 John Curtiss 和 Kanik Varma 介绍。这个流程被应用于 Progressive 的所有业务线。产品研发、定价和产品管理团队协作来确定费率需求，以支持我们的运营目标：在综合赔付率不超过 96 的前提下尽可能快地增长。其他团队会加入这三者，将最终的费率调整部署到市场上。一旦部署，消费者的报价保费就会反映修订后的费率。让我们聚焦于这三个协作确定费率需求的团队。费率需求有两个主要方面：细分层面和总体费率。在本次演讲中，Brad 深入探讨了我们在定价中所运用的最佳精算科学，用于评估未来修订中总体费率需求，以实现预算损失和 LAE 比率的目标。
Product R\&D calculates the segment rate need for the relative rate need across variables used in the product design and product managers leverage these aggregate and segment level rate needs, along with their knowledge of the local market dynamics to set the pricing strategy for their respective states. They decide if the segmentation, aggregate rate level or both need to be revised. A product manager strategy ensures that we seek to not only hit rate revision targets but also our calendar year goal to grow as fast as we can at or below a 96 combined ratio. At Progressive, we believe that our ratemaking process is effective because of the knowledge at the local level combined with the advanced and accurate view of segment level and aggregate rate need. And we strive to maximize its effectiveness by analyzing the rate need often and bringing revised rates to market quickly.
产品研发部门计算产品设计中使用的各个变量的相对费率需求，而产品经理则结合总体和细分层面的费率需求，以及他们对本地市场动态的了解，为各自所在州制定定价策略。他们决定是否需要修订细分、总体费率水平或两者兼顾。产品经理的策略确保我们不仅要达到费率修订目标，还要实现全年目标，即在综合赔付率不超过 96 的情况下尽可能快地增长。在 Progressive，我们认为我们的费率制定流程之所以有效，是因为本地层面的知识与对细分和总体费率需求的先进且精准的理解相结合。我们努力通过频繁分析费率需求并迅速将修订后的费率推向市场，来最大化该流程的有效性。
In personal auto pricing, we frequently evaluate the expected loss and LAE ratio in the future revision. We complete rate level indication analyses on 51 states with each agency and direct distribution channel done individually. Also, there are 12 to 15 coverages analyzed separately. For example, the bodily injury liability and comprehensive physical damage coverages each have their own indicated aggregate rate need because the data patterns are different, such as frequency and severity trends. These analyses are completed 3 or 4 times per year and discussed with the product manager of the specific state and channel along with their team. The numbers on this slide show that we're calculating the fundamental pricing equation roughly 4,000 times in a year. And each of those includes all the complex actuarial methodologies, analyses and selections that Brad discussed. So that's 4,000 times our pricing teams are analyzing how losses will develop to ultimate costs. And 4,000 times we're discussing with product managers how losses will trend into the future rate revision period.
在个人车险定价中，我们经常评估未来修订中的预期损失和 LAE 比率。我们对 51 个州分别进行费率水平指示分析，每个代理渠道和直销渠道分别独立完成。此外，还有 12 到 15 种险种分别单独分析。例如，人身伤害责任险和综合物损险各自都有其总体费率需求指示，因为它们的数据模式不同，比如频率和严重性趋势。这些分析每年进行 3 至 4 次，并与特定州及渠道的产品经理及其团队进行讨论。本页幻灯片上的数字显示，我们每年大约要计算 4,000 次基本定价公式。每一次都包含 Brad 所讲的所有复杂精算方法、分析和选择。这意味着我们的定价团队每年 4,000 次分析损失将如何发展到最终成本，并且 4,000 次与产品经理讨论损失将如何在未来的费率修订期中演变。
In commercial auto pricing, our dataset is smaller. However, we're still analyzing the aggregate rate need quarterly and discussing with the product management teams. We aggregate most states together to improve the credibility of our Progressive data. The largest 4 states are analyzed individually. Rate revision and calendar year combined ratio results for smaller states are monitored. Rates are revised at the state level because of insurance regulation. And for rate revisions, we complete a rate level indication that uses state-specific data. We evaluate our aggregate rate needs separately for our 5 business market targets. Differences by BMT and how losses present and how they develop and frequency and severity trends over time, affect the estimated loss ratio in the future revision. And finally, there are 9 coverages analyzed separately in commercial auto rate level indications.
在商用车险定价中，我们的数据集较小。然而，我们仍然每季度分析总体费率需求，并与产品管理团队讨论。我们将大多数州的数据合并，以提高 Progressive 数据的可信度。最大的 4 个州则单独分析。对较小州的费率修订和全年综合赔付率结果进行监测。由于保险监管的要求，费率在州一级进行修订。对于费率修订，我们会完成使用州别特定数据的费率水平指示。我们还会分别评估 5 个业务市场目标的总体费率需求。不同 BMT 的差异，以及损失的表现方式、发展方式以及频率和严重性趋势，都会影响未来修订中的预计赔付率。最后，商用车险的费率水平指示中有 9 种险种分别进行分析。
Overall, we're analyzing and discussing at least 900 fundamental pricing equations in a year. The regular cadence of these complex analyses in both personal lines and commercial lines auto is so important in understanding the aggregate rate need and being responsive to changes in the data. But it's not enough to analyze the rate need often. To truly respond to the changing data, we need to deploy rate changes to the market quickly.
总体而言，我们每年至少要分析和讨论 900 次基本定价公式。在个人车险和商用车险中，定期进行这些复杂的分析非常重要，有助于理解总体费率需求并及时响应数据变化。但仅仅频繁分析费率需求还不够。要真正应对不断变化的数据，我们需要将费率变更快速推向市场。
This chart shows the number of rate revisions that are deployed each year over the past 5 years in our Personal Lines Auto and Commercial Lines auto products. We deploy many rate changes to market to adjust either the segment level, or aggregate rates, or both. And we have the capabilities at Progressive to increase the number of revisions deployed. For example, in 2023, both the personal lines and commercial lines auto rate revision teams responded quickly and often to increasing loss costs and loss development in our underlying data. These rate revision capabilities are very important to our success at Progressive. Moving quickly is important because of the time needed for some states' regulatory approval of rate changes and because of the premium earnings cadence a policy written today at the new rate level will have earned premium in each month that it's in force or for the next 6 or 12 months depending on the policy term. So it takes many months for the earned premium in the denominator of our calendar year combined ratio to fully reflect the new rate level.
这张图展示了过去 5 年中，我们在个人车险和商用车险产品中每年部署的费率修订次数。我们向市场推出了大量费率变更，以调整细分层面、总体费率水平或两者兼顾。而且在 Progressive，我们具备提升费率修订次数的能力。例如，在 2023 年，个人险和商用险的费率修订团队对基础数据中不断上升的损失成本和损失发展作出了快速且频繁的响应。这些费率修订能力对 Progressive 的成功至关重要。快速行动很重要，因为某些州的费率变更需要监管批准，同时，由于保费收入的节奏，一份今天以新费率签发的保单，在其有效期内的每个月都会产生已赚保费，期限为 6 个月或 12 个月，具体取决于保单期限。因此，需要数月时间，我们的年度综合赔付率的分母才能完全反映新的费率水平。
We are confident in our pricing teams aggregate rate level recommendations using our robust data sets and we have an efficient process to deploy rate changes to the insurance market. However, there are times we must respond to changes and intervene in our fundamental pricing equation because historical data may not be informative. Recall that car accidents are not corn flakes. We are selling a promise to pay for claims in the future policy term. For example, changes in tariffs on imports may impact the payments on claims or loss payments in the future. Our role in the pricing teams is to answer the 2 fundamental pricing questions for the policies we are about to write in the upcoming rate revision.
我们对定价团队使用强大数据集所做出的总体费率水平建议充满信心，并且我们有高效的流程将费率变更推向保险市场。然而，有时我们必须应对变化并干预基本定价公式，因为历史数据可能并不具备参考价值。请记住，车祸不是“玉米片”。我们出售的是未来保单期间支付理赔的承诺。例如，进口关税的变化可能会影响未来的理赔支付。定价团队的职责就是为即将签发的保单在即将进行的费率修订中回答两个基本定价问题。
But we have no previous loss payment experience with the changes to tariffs. Consistent with the Casualty Actuarial Society's statement of principles on ratemaking, we answer these 2 questions with an actuarially sound estimate of the expected value of all future costs, including changes in tariffs. Calculating the expected value of the future loss payments from changes to tariffs is not straightforward because auto claims are not all the same. Broadly speaking, we split the loss payments into claims for damaged vehicles versus injuries. And these 2 categories can be further split into similar types of costs.
但是，我们在关税变化方面没有以往的损失支付经验。根据美国财产保险精算学会 (Casualty Actuarial Society) 关于费率制定的原则声明，我们用精算合理的方式估算所有未来成本的期望值（包括关税变化），来回答这两个问题。计算因关税变化带来的未来损失支付的期望值并不简单，因为汽车理赔并不完全相同。大体而言，我们将损失支付分为车辆损坏索赔和人身伤害索赔。这两类还可以进一步划分为类似类型的成本。
Starting with damaged vehicles. If it is repairable, the loss payment includes the cost of labor and parts and materials. If the repair is more costly than the value of the vehicle less anticipated salvage recoveries, then it is declared a total loss, and the claimant has paid the value. The expected value of the future loss payments from changes to tariffs is calculated at this more granular level of data. For example, the labor parts and materials, the value of a vehicle and salvage recoveries. This is because the cost in this granular level of data are more similar. Also, we consider the insurance coverage to the calculation of the expected value of the future loss payments from changes to tariffs. Collision and comprehensive coverage for our customer's damaged vehicle usually has a deductible for the first \$500 or \$1,000 but the maximum payment is unlimited. Compare this to property damage liability coverage for a claimant's damaged vehicle, it has a limit to the maximum payment.
从车辆损坏开始。如果车辆可修复，赔付款项包括人工、零件和材料的成本。如果修理费用超过了车辆价值减去预期残值回收，则该车辆被认定为全损，索赔人将获得车辆价值的赔付。因关税变化导致的未来赔付款项的期望值是在这一更细化的数据层面计算的。例如，人工、零件和材料的成本、车辆的价值以及残值回收。这是因为在这一层面的成本数据更为相似。此外，我们在计算因关税变化导致的未来赔付款项的期望值时，还会考虑保险保障范围。客户受损车辆的碰撞险和综合险通常有 \$500 或 \$1,000 的免赔额，但最高赔付额是无限的。相比之下，第三方财产损失责任险对索赔人车辆损坏的赔付则有最高限额。
For example, \$25,000 on a personal lines auto policy. For injuries to claimants or our customers, the loss payment includes the cost of medical treatment. The loss payment may also include general damages, such as pain and suffering. Again, we analyze how the changes to tariffs may affect these 2 different types of costs included in injury loss payments and we consider the insurance coverage.
例如，个人车险保单中为 \$25,000。对于索赔人或客户的人身伤害，赔付款项包括医疗费用，赔付还可能包括诸如痛苦与精神损害的间接损失。同样，我们会分析关税变化如何影响伤害赔付款项中这两种不同类型的成本，并且会考虑保险保障范围。
Insurance coverage for injuries usually has a limit to the maximum payment per claim. For example, \$50,000 per injured person and \$100,000 for all injured claimants on a personal lines auto policies bodily injury liability coverage. A commercial auto policy often carries significantly higher bodily injury and property damage liability coverage. For example, \$1 million combined single limit. But the pricing team is not working alone. We believe our analyses are improved by collaborating across functions at Progressive. We leverage subject matter expertise to calculate the expected value of the future loss payments from changes to tariffs.
人身伤害的保险保障通常对单次索赔有最高赔付限额。例如，个人车险保单中的人身伤害责任险每位受伤者赔付限额为 \$50,000，所有受伤者合计赔付限额为 \$100,000。而商用车险保单通常有人身伤害和财产损失责任险的赔付限额要高得多。例如，单一合并赔付限额为 \$100 万美元。但定价团队并不是单独工作的。我们认为，通过在 Progressive 内跨职能合作可以提升我们的分析质量。我们依赖专业领域专家的知识来计算因关税变化导致的未来赔付款项的期望值。
The economics team within Progressive's capital management function provides interpretation on the federal government's actions and timing for implementation. They also share insights and external economic indices related to tariffs and imports. Members of the claims functions, process and control teams provide subject matter expertise on the categories of loss payments described in the previous slide to evaluate if they are impacted by tariffs. They provide the necessary granular data. The pricing team aggregates this information from the economics and claims teams to calculate the expected value of future loss payments, including changes to tariffs. We then incorporate this expected value of loss payments within the fundamental pricing equation to calculate the expected loss and LAE ratio in the upcoming revision for the policies we will write.
Progressive 资本管理职能中的经济团队会解读联邦政府的行动及实施时间。他们还会分享与关税和进口相关的洞察以及外部经济指标。理赔职能、流程和控制团队的成员则在前一页提到的赔付类别上提供专业知识，以评估这些类别是否受到关税影响。他们提供必要的细化数据。定价团队会整合来自经济和理赔团队的信息，计算未来赔付款项的期望值（包括关税变化）。然后，我们将这一赔付期望值纳入基本定价公式，用于计算即将签发保单的修订版中的预期损失和 LAE 比率。
Progressive has multiple pricing teams within the personal lines and commercial lines functions. Personal Lines is also split by auto, home and special lines. In addition to collaborating with economics and claims, we also collaborate among the pricing groups to share and debate methodologies and assumptions. Despite all the best actuarial methods for evaluating the aggregate rate need, communicating with product managers and deploying quickly to market, predicting the future is impossible. So our initial expected value of future loss payments, including changes in tariffs will be wrong.
Progressive 在个人险和商用险部门内设有多个定价团队。个人险又细分为车险、房屋险和特殊险。除了与经济和理赔团队合作外，我们还在定价团队之间进行协作，分享并讨论方法论和假设。尽管我们在评估总体费率需求方面采用了最佳精算方法，并与产品经理沟通并快速推向市场，但预测未来是不可能做到完全准确的。因此，我们对未来赔付款项的初始期望值（包括关税变化）将会有偏差。
The fundamental pricing equation requires us to estimate future loss payments and other costs. All our future predictions are wrong to some degree and the probability of being wrong increases with changes that have minimal historic precedents, such as inflationary impacts when an economy emerges from a pandemic or the frequently changing impacts of tariffs. Pricing, claims and economics teams are working together to monitor the actual change in loss payments from implemented changes to tariffs. The scale and quality of our data at Progressive allows us to quickly identify the change in the actual loss payments and compare it to our expected value. This leads to refining our calculations. Our robust dataset at Progressive and the expertise of multiple teams contributes to our speed through this iterative cycle of estimate, monitor and refine. We are moving quickly to the center of the bull's-eye from Brad's slides, where our expected value of future loss payments from changes in tariffs are accurate and precise.
基本定价公式要求我们估算未来的赔付款项和其他成本。我们所有的未来预测都会在某种程度上出现偏差，并且在几乎没有历史先例的变化情境下（例如经济从疫情中恢复时的通胀影响，或频繁变化的关税影响），出错的概率会更高。定价、理赔和经济团队正在共同监测因关税变化实施而导致的实际赔付款项的变化。Progressive 的数据规模和质量使我们能够迅速识别实际赔付款项的变化，并将其与我们的期望值进行比较，从而不断改进我们的计算。Progressive 强大的数据集以及多团队的专业知识，帮助我们在这一估算、监测和优化的迭代循环中保持高速前进。我们正在快速逼近 Brad 幻灯片中的靶心中心，在那里因关税变化导致的未来赔付款项期望值更加准确和精确。
Producing the rate-level indications often provides the updated aggregate rate level advice to product managers so they can recognize the differences in the refined expected value of the future loss payments. And we have the capability to deploy necessary rate changes quickly. The speed of estimating, monitoring and refining our rate level indications and deploying the right rate change is important to deliver on our profit targets. And we want to write more business when we have accurate rates relative to the expected costs.
生成费率水平指示通常会为产品经理提供更新的总体费率水平建议，使他们能够识别精细化后的未来赔付款项期望值的差异。而且我们有能力快速部署必要的费率变更。快速进行费率水平指示的估算、监测和优化，并及时部署正确的费率变更，对于实现我们的利润目标至关重要。当我们的费率相对于预期成本准确时，我们希望能承保更多业务。
Changes in tariffs are not our first intervention to the fundamental pricing equation. Our combined ratio results show that we have moved quicker than the industry to recognize increasing costs, raise rates and deliver on our operational goal of at or below a 96 combined ratio. In Personal Auto, the standard deviation of our annual combined ratios in this 11 years from 2014 through 2024 is half of the average standard deviation from the other top 10 carriers. So we are responding quicker and making smart interventions. Pricing's collaboration with subject matter experts in other Progressive functions along with the infrastructure to analyze rate need often and deploy rate changes quickly, has proven effective in responsiveness and stability of our combined ratio and is a major contributor to our outperformance of the industry.
关税变化并不是我们首次对基本定价公式进行干预。我们的综合赔付率结果显示，我们比行业更快地识别了成本上升、提高了费率，并实现了在综合赔付率不超过 96 的运营目标。在个人车险方面，从 2014 年到 2024 年的 11 年间，我们年度综合赔付率的标准差仅为前十大保险公司平均标准差的一半。因此，我们反应更快，并做出了更明智的干预。定价团队与 Progressive 其他职能部门的专业专家合作，再加上频繁分析费率需求并快速部署费率变更的基础设施，已被证明在提升综合赔付率的响应性和稳定性方面卓有成效，这也是我们行业表现优于同行的一个重要原因。
这一点GEICO的团队也是承认的。
Douglas S. Constantine
This concludes the previously recorded portion of today's event. We now have members of our management team available live to answer questions, including presenters, Brad Granger and Jen Kubit, who are available to answer questions about the presentation. \[Operator Instructions]
今天的活动录制部分到此结束。现在我们有管理团队成员现场回答问题，包括演讲嘉宾 Brad Granger 和 Jen Kubit，他们将解答与演讲相关的问题。\[操作员说明]
Question-and-Answer Session
问答环节
Operator
Our first question comes from the line of Rob Cox of Goldman Sachs.
第一个问题来自高盛的 Rob Cox。
Robert Cox
Yes. Just first question on quote volume growth. I was just looking at quote volume growth and it looks like direct quote volume increases have really taken off while agency quote volume has not seen exactly the same acceleration. So I'm curious if the actions you're taking in the property book are limiting agency quote volume? And would you expect to see a tailwind in agency quote volume as you wind down those actions in the property book?
是的。我的第一个问题是关于报价量的增长。我刚刚看了报价量的增长，似乎直销渠道的报价量增长非常快，而代理渠道的报价量增长并没有出现同样的加速。因此我想知道，你们在财产险业务中采取的措施是否限制了代理渠道的报价量？随着你们逐步结束在财产险业务中的这些措施，是否预计代理渠道的报价量会出现顺风增长？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. Thanks, Rob. One, our direct volume reflects our increase in advertisement. But also when you're thinking about property quote, yes, there's a difference in agency. So you're going through an agency, you have one offering with Progressive and that's Progressive home. When you go through direct, we have many unaffiliated partners so we can write with them. So if it doesn't fit our appetite need, it can fit an appetite need of one of our unaffiliated partners. So we feel like with where -- what we've done in the past couple of years, there will be some nice tailwinds in both the agency and direct channel because we're in such a better position in our property book as far as less volatile areas and clearly, our combined ratio.
是的，谢谢你，Rob。首先，我们直销渠道的增长反映了广告投放的增加。但在财产险报价方面，确实存在代理渠道的差异。如果你通过代理渠道投保，你只有 Progressive 的一个选择，那就是 Progressive home。但如果通过直销渠道，我们有许多非关联合作伙伴，因此可以与他们合作承保。如果不符合我们的风险偏好需求，可能会符合我们某个非关联合作伙伴的需求。因此我们认为，基于过去几年所做的调整，无论在代理渠道还是直销渠道都会迎来一些顺风因素，因为在财产险业务中，我们目前处于更有利的位置，投保区域波动性更低，综合赔付率也更加理想。
过去10个季度，直销的增长始终快于代理。
Robert Cox
That's helpful. And then I just wanted to follow up on Florida. Can you help us think through the potential size of the Florida refund related to the excess profitability? And how are you thinking about pricing moving forward in Florida given where the profits are?
这很有帮助。接下来我想追问一下关于佛罗里达的问题。你能帮我们理解一下与超额盈利相关的佛罗里达退款潜在规模吗？鉴于目前的利润情况，你们对佛罗里达未来的定价有何考虑？
Susan Patricia Griffith
I'll take the last part of the question first. So we've reduced rates in Florida twice in the last year, 8% in December, another 6% in June. We care deeply about Florida. We're the #1 writer. And when the insurance reform passed in 2023, House Bill 837, we were really hopeful that, that would -- it would reduce loss cost and it has done just that. So I do want to take -- I don't know that I have said this before but these reforms and our hope is that they continue, have really made a difference for Floridians.
我先回答问题的后半部分。过去一年中，我们在佛罗里达已经下调了两次费率，去年 12 月下调 8%，今年 6 月再下调 6%。我们非常重视佛罗里达市场，我们是该州的第一大保险公司。当 2023 年的保险改革（House Bill 837）通过时，我们非常希望这能降低赔付成本，而事实确实如此。我想借此机会强调一下（我不确定以前是否说过），这些改革确实让佛罗里达居民受益匪浅，我们也希望它们能够持续下去。
And hats off to commissioner Yaworsky and Governor DeSantis for writing that and sticking to it because it really has been incredible. Florida does have an excess profits statute that is a rolling 3-year basis, so think of '23, '24 and '25. So without having half of '25, I couldn't give you a guesstimate with any accuracy, especially as we head into hurricane season. But if our profits from those periods exceed the statutory limit, we will absolutely be able to comply with the provisions and give that money back to policyholders at that time. So we're watching that closely. We have an internal estimate but it could change dramatically given hurricane season.
我要特别感谢专员 Yaworsky 和州长 DeSantis 推动并坚持这一改革，因为效果真的非常显著。佛罗里达确实有一项关于超额利润的法规，是基于滚动 3 年周期的，所以涉及到 2023、2024 和 2025 年。由于 2025 年还未过半，我无法给出一个准确的估算，尤其是考虑到飓风季即将来临。但如果在这些年份的利润超过法定上限，我们一定会遵守规定，把多余的利润返还给保单持有人。因此我们正密切关注这一情况。我们内部有一个估算，但考虑到飓风季，它可能会发生巨大变化。
长期有利于已成规模的企业。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Bob Jian Huang of Morgan Stanley.
下一个问题来自摩根士丹利的 Bob Jian Huang。
Jian Huang
Looking at your 10-Q, you talked about policy life expectancy for personal auto declined 5% due to -- due in part to business mix shift. Is this the same business mix you talked about in the other parts of the 10-Q where you're shifting towards the Robinsons and the Wrights? Intuitively, I thought those should have higher policy life expectancy. Can you help us think about that?
在你们的 10-Q 中提到，个人车险的保单生命周期下降了 5%，部分原因是业务组合的变化。这是否就是你们在 10-Q 其他部分提到的，正在向 Robinsons 和 Wrights 转移的业务组合？直观上我认为这些群体的保单生命周期应该更长。你能帮我们理解一下吗？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. The mix shift has changed dramatically because of what happened with inflation in 2023. And so we closed down our underwriting appetite and brought in a lot more preferred business mix. Since we've opened up, as you can see, especially in the -- actually both channels, we have -- we're writing a lot more Sams, which is lower PLE. We expect that. We know that. We have a history of that as long as we make our profit target margins on those Sams, it is great.
是的。业务组合发生了巨大变化，原因是 2023 年的通胀。因此我们收紧了承保偏好，引入了更多优选业务组合。自从重新开放以来，你可以看到，尤其是在——实际上是在两个渠道，我们承保了更多的 Sams，这类客户的保单生命周期较短。我们对此是预期之内的，我们清楚这一点，并且在历史上也有经验。只要我们能在这些 Sams 身上实现目标利润率，这就是好事。
So a couple of different things on auto PLE that I would talk about. This is probably a little bit redundant from last quarter but there's a lot of shopping going on. So in a hard market, that's going to happen. Is that necessarily bad? No, because if the price isn't right in our book and people shopping can get a lower price, we believe, as you just heard from both Brad and Jen that we price pretty darn accurately and we have a rate revision machine. So it could be \[ adverse ] selection. It could be going to someone who hasn't got the right price on the street.
关于汽车险 PLE，我想说几点。这可能和上个季度讲过的有些重复，但现在市场上有很多比价购物行为。在硬性市场环境下，这种情况是必然的。这一定是坏事吗？并不是。因为如果我们的价格不合适，而消费者能在市场上找到更低的价格，那也没关系。我们相信——正如你刚刚从 Brad 和 Jen 那里听到的——我们的定价非常准确，而且我们有一个“费率修订机器”。所以客户可能是“逆向选择”，也可能是流向那些街头价格不合理的竞争对手。
And secondly, the mix shift that you're seeing in the PLEs is with Sams. So it's compared to the base of the preferred business we've put on the books a few years ago. And then lastly, when people do shop, we talked about this last quarter, we will look at their policy, do a policy review, look at build plans and different things that could cause us to rewrite with us starting the clock ticking over. So although we keep that customer, you'll see the decline in PLE. I have reasons to believe that, that will start to turn around. But again, that we'll see as the data comes out.
其次，你看到的 PLE 下降是因为 Sams 的增加。和几年前我们账面上的优选业务相比，这类客户的占比提高了。最后，当客户去比价时——我们上个季度也讲过——我们会审查他们的保单，进行保单回顾，查看付款计划等各种情况，这可能导致我们与客户重新签单，从而重新计算生命周期。所以尽管我们保留了客户，但你仍然会看到 PLE 的下降。我有理由相信这种情况会开始扭转，但最终还得等数据出来才会更清楚。
I would point you to and we're not going to actually share this all the time but we have an internal measure of household life expectancy, which gives a 30-day ability to rewrite and our household life expectancy is up. So that's kind of my reason to believe that PLE could follow. Again, a lot of PLE has to do with mix, how long the hard market continues or the shopping behavior of consumers, which could maybe dramatically change in this last 2 or 3 years based on all the inflationary measures. So a lot of data going into that but hopefully, that gives you a little bit more color.
我想指出一点，我们不会一直对外披露，但我们内部有一个衡量“家庭生命周期”的指标，它允许在 30 天内进行重写，而我们的家庭生命周期指标是上升的。这也是我认为 PLE 可能会跟随改善的原因之一。再强调一次，PLE 很大程度上取决于客户结构、硬市场环境能持续多久，以及消费者的购物行为，而这些行为可能在过去两三年里由于各种通胀因素发生了巨大变化。所以这里涉及的数据非常复杂，但希望这能给你更多的理解。
Jian Huang
Great. Second question is on tariff. Again, this is something that I think the right way to think about it is it introduces uncertainty. But maybe on the personal auto side, if we remove the tariff as a headwind, is it fair to say that you should be able to grow much more aggressively or reduce your pricing significantly? Is that essentially the only thing that kind of keeps you away from reducing pricing further?
很好。第二个问题是关于关税的。我认为正确的看法是它带来了不确定性。但在个人车险方面，如果我们去掉关税这个逆风因素，是否可以认为你们会有更强劲的增长，或者大幅降低定价？关税是否基本上就是唯一阻碍你们进一步降价的因素？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Well, we wanted to be conservative because of the uncertainty around tariffs. We -- every day that passes, we get more certainty around that. Here's how we look at it. We look at every state, new and renewal, every product, look at the margin, look at our ability to grow and we'll always try to grow as fast as we can at a 96. So we've -- where states where we need a little rate, we'll go up a little bit, where states that we believe we can grow like a Florida, will reduce rates. And we're back to where we want to be and that's taking small bites of the apple on either end. And that allows us to keep rates stable and competitive for our customers, which we talk about as one of our key strategic pillars. So if we feel like we can grow and we have the margin, and we have more certainty, we'll absolutely do what whatever it needs -- whatever we need to grow and grow profitably.
我们之所以保持保守，是因为关税带来的不确定性。但随着时间推移，我们对这一点越来越有把握。我们的做法是：逐个州、逐个新保单和续保单、逐个产品地看，关注利润率和增长能力，我们始终努力在综合赔付率 96 的水平下尽可能快地增长。所以，在某些需要小幅提价的州，我们会略微提价；在一些我们认为可以增长的州，比如佛罗里达，我们会降低费率。这样，我们又回到理想的状态，就是在两端都小口咬苹果。这样可以保持对客户而言费率的稳定性和竞争力，这是我们谈到的关键战略支柱之一。所以，如果我们觉得能够增长，且利润率充足、确定性更高时，我们一定会采取一切必要措施来实现盈利性增长。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Elyse Greenspan of Wells Fargo.
下一个问题来自富国银行的 Elyse Greenspan。
Elyse Beth Greenspan
My first question on -- is just continuing on personal auto, right? I mean we see new business is up, PLE is down, which I think you addressed a little bit earlier. But as you think about going forward, how do you expect, I guess, policies in force growth to trend given these trends, combined with the fact, right, you guys called out, right, you took around less than 1% rate decline in the quarter in personal auto and you're still increasing ad spend. So I'm just trying to get a forward view on PIF growth with all these things to consider.
我的第一个问题还是关于个人车险的。我们看到新业务在增长，而 PLE 在下降，我想你刚才也提到过一些。但展望未来，在这些趋势的作用下，再结合你们在本季度个人车险中降价不到 1%，同时广告支出还在增加的情况，你们预期保单在保数量（PIF）的增长会如何变化？我想获得一个关于 PIF 增长的前瞻性看法。
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. I mean it's hard to compare 2025, which was -- has been incredible already to 2024, which was the best year in the history of Progressive. But the fact is we grew over 5 million PIFs year-over-year and 1 million in PL just in this quarter. So we believe there's an opportunity to continue to grow. We believe we're in a really great position. And I think where we feel like we're in even a better position is to now grow that Robinson book. So we feel like we're in a different position in our property and have a lot of plans to continue to work out the blueprint and ultimately open up a bit. .
是的。我认为要把 2025 年（迄今已经非常出色的一年）与 2024 年（Progressive 历史上最好的年份）进行比较是很难的。但事实是，我们同比增长了超过 500 万份 PIF，仅在本季度个人险（PL）就新增了 100 万份保单。因此我们认为仍有机会继续增长。我们觉得自己处于一个非常有利的位置。我认为我们甚至处于一个更好的位置，就是现在能够扩大 Robinson 客户群。所以我们认为在财产险业务方面，我们正处于一个新的阶段，并且有很多计划继续推进蓝图，最终逐步放开一些限制。
And because we have all those auto policies, we have those future Robinsons or Robinsons that have an auto and home but not home with us. So I think the opportunity really lends itself to grow more preferred. We have -- I think we have a lot of opportunity in that area and that will be our focus. Again, we'll be strategic. We're not going to swing the pendulum the other way. We've certainly learned a lot about the property book and the volatility across the country in the last 5 to 10 years. But we're really well positioned. And the fact that we have all that auto business on the book, I think, is really important. There's a lot of market share for us to capture. So I remain bullish. Comparisons are more difficult when you're comparing to the best year in the history of Progressive.
而且因为我们拥有这么多车险保单，这意味着我们未来拥有潜在的 Robinson 客户，或者那些已经有车险和房险但房险不是在我们这里投保的 Robinsons。所以我认为这给了我们更多发展优选客户的机会。我认为在这一领域我们有很多机会，这将是我们的重点。再次强调，我们会保持战略性，而不会把钟摆摆向另一端。在过去 5 到 10 年里，我们确实在财产险账本以及全国范围内的波动性上学到了很多经验。但我们现在的位置非常好。而且我们账面上有这么多车险业务，我认为这一点非常关键。这里仍有很多市场份额等待我们去获取。所以我依然保持乐观。但要记住，把现在与 Progressive 历史上最好的一年相比，确实很难。
有进一步扩展的空间。
Elyse Beth Greenspan
And then my second question, Tricia, in your letter, you mentioned -- there were some comments on capital and just obviously holding capital as a detriment to your return. If you could just expand on that? And I guess if you guys are thinking about incremental capital return, I know there's a balance with using capital for growth. Is that a reference just to -- you guys normally have a special dividend later on in the year? Or would you consider incremental repurchases? I'm just hoping to flesh out that comment a little bit.
第二个问题，Tricia，在你的信中，你提到过关于资本的评论，显然持有资本会影响回报。你能否展开说明一下？我猜如果你们考虑额外的资本回馈，应该会在资本用于增长之间做平衡。那么这是否指的是——你们通常会在年底发放一次特别股息？或者你们会考虑额外的股票回购？我只是希望能更清楚地理解你的这部分评论。
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. We'll continue -- we needed a lot of capital and have needed a lot of capital to grow. So we have our regulatory base and then our contingency layer and extreme contingency. So we continue to model that out. And then we have 3 ways to return capital. The first -- and our preferred way is to grow the business. So we've been doing that and we'll continue to do that. And then we buy back shares of stock to reduce the dilution from our stock-based compensation and we've done that. We will buy more stock back if it's under our intrinsic value. So we look at that model constantly. And then yes, usually, typically in December, is when the Board of Directors name, if we have one, a variable dividend. And so we've started modeling out that now when I say we, Jon Bauer, John Sauerland and I start, thinking about how to present that to the Board. Ultimately, it will be their decision. And again, we have a lot of year left with storm seasons coming up, but that would be another opportunity should the Board decide to give capital back in the form of a variable dividend.
是的。我们会继续下去——我们需要大量资本，并且一直需要大量资本来支持增长。所以我们有一个监管资本基础层，然后是应急层和极端应急层。我们会不断进行建模分析。然后我们有三种方式回馈资本。第一种，也是我们最优先的方式，就是发展业务。这是我们一直在做的，并且会继续做。第二，我们会回购股票以减少基于股票的薪酬所带来的稀释，这一点我们也在执行。如果股价低于我们的内在价值，我们会回购更多股票，所以我们会不断评估这个模型。第三，通常在 12 月，董事会会决定是否发放一次特别股息（可变股息）。我们现在已经开始进行相关建模，当我说“我们”的时候，指的是我、Jon Bauer 和 John Sauerland 开始思考如何向董事会呈报。最终还是要由董事会来决定。再强调一点，今年还剩下很长时间，风暴季节也即将来临，但如果董事会决定通过可变股息的形式回馈资本，那也将是一个选择。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Josh Shanker of Bank of America.
下一个问题来自美国银行的 Josh Shanker。
Joshua David Shanker
Following up on -- a lot of talk around PLE and taking out a lot of Sams. I'm just wondering if you did nothing particular to improve the PLE of the company but just let the excess Sams who came on board bake off on their own regular time line. Would retention just improve naturally at the company by the passage of time? And if so, when might we see that inflection take place given all the business you added in 2024?
关于 PLE 和大量 Sams 客户的问题，我想追问一下。如果你们不采取任何特别措施来改善公司的 PLE，而只是让新增的这些 Sams 客户按照正常时间逐步流失，那么公司的续保率是否会随着时间自然改善？如果是这样的话，考虑到你们在 2024 年增加了那么多业务，我们大概什么时候能看到这种拐点出现？
Susan Patricia Griffith
I hope I understood your question. I mean I do want to say -- so Sams have always had a lower PLE and we actually further segment different Sams and I won't go into all the details. If Sams ran off because they were shopping and leaving, yes, our retention would go up. But again, we like to have as many -- our Sams are sort of our upbringing. So we love having Sams on the book as long as we make our calendar year and our lifetime profit targets on that. Did I understand your question, Josh?
我希望我理解了你的问题。我要说明的是，Sams 客户的 PLE 一直较低，我们实际上还会对不同类型的 Sams 进一步细分，这里我就不展开了。如果 Sams 因为比价而流失，那么没错，我们的续保率确实会提高。但我们依然希望保有尽可能多的 Sams，因为 Sams 就像我们的起点。只要我们能在年度和客户全生命周期上达到利润目标，我们就很乐意把 Sams 客户保留在账本上。我理解你的问题对吗，Josh？
Joshua David Shanker
Yes, I'm just wondering, in 2024, maybe you capture a greater percentage of the Sams market that you normally would and your -- and the mix of business is -- was more Sam directed. So as such, our retention is down. But if you fast forward to your normal mix of Sams and Dianes and Robinsons, that means that, I guess, PLE would just go naturally up because you're new customer acquisition wasn't decidedly Sam oriented. Is that a correct way to think about that?
是的，我的意思是，在 2024 年，你们可能捕获了比以往更大比例的 Sams 市场，因此业务组合更偏向 Sams。结果续保率下降。但如果未来回归到你们正常的 Sams、Dianes 和 Robinsons 的组合，那么 PLE 自然会随之上升，因为你们的新客户获取不再那么集中于 Sams。这样理解是否正确？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes, that's a good way of thinking about it. I think a lot could happen though. I started -- I talked little bit, I think, during Elyse's question, I believe, or Bob's about us wanting to grow Robinson. So it depends on other segments we bring on. It depends on competitors' rates and what our customers do. And again, there is some noise, I think, in our data for sure and I believe others with people shopping but shopping with their current company because they don't necessarily want to leave and even though that starts the time clock over, that customer didn't leave, we just did a policy review. So there's a little bit of noise in there. But I think the way -- if all things were stable, the way you're saying that would play out, I just don't think all things would be stable.
是的，你的理解很有道理。不过情况可能会更复杂。我之前在回答 Elyse 或 Bob 的问题时提到过，我们希望发展 Robinson 客户群。因此，这还取决于我们引入的其他客户群体，取决于竞争对手的费率以及客户的选择。另外，我认为数据中确实存在一些噪音，其他公司可能也一样。比如，一些客户会“比价”，但其实他们并不想换公司，他们只是和现有公司重新谈保单。虽然这样会让时间重新开始计算，但客户实际上并没有流失，我们只是做了一次保单审核。所以这里面有一些噪音。不过，如果一切条件稳定，情况确实会如你所说的发展。但我认为现实中条件不会那么稳定。
Joshua David Shanker
And then, look, obviously, you're fantastically profitable right now. You're also spending a lot on ads. If those ads are procuring a lot of Sams, is the ad spend for low duration or low policy \[indiscernible] expecting customers justified? Or are you expecting that you will only have those policies for 6 months or 12 months and it's working out exactly as planned?
另外，很显然，你们现在的盈利状况非常好，同时广告投放也很大。如果这些广告带来的是大量 Sams 客户，那么这种广告支出是否合理？毕竟他们的保单期限较短、价值较低。还是说，你们原本就预期这些保单只会持续 6 个月或 12 个月，并且这完全在计划之内？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. We look at -- we won't try to bring on any customer in any of our segments on the book if we don't believe it to be to reach our target profit margins. As long as our cost per sale is under attack, which it is, we'll continue to spend and grow in every segment that we can. Because, again, some of those Sams are going to be future Robinsons at some point. They'll turn into Dianes and they'll get a renter's policy. As you know, we're growing a lot in renters policy. They'll eventually buy a home and the likelihood of them sticking with Progressive for a home as high. So again, we want to bring everybody in but we look at that totally from targeted the acquisition cost of each segment.
是的。我们不会尝试引入任何一个我们认为达不到目标利润率的客户群。只要我们的获客成本保持在合理范围内（目前确实如此），我们就会继续在所有能够发展的客户群体上投放和增长。因为有些 Sams 在未来会变成 Robinsons。他们会先转变成 Dianes，购买租房险。正如你们所知道的，我们在租房险上增长很快。他们最终会买房，而选择继续留在 Progressive 的可能性很高。所以，我们希望把所有客户都带进来，但我们完全是基于每个细分客户群的获客成本来判断。
短频快的业务，定价合理的话不需要过度关注客户的质量。
Joshua David Shanker
I'd love to hear more about Sams turning into Robinsons in the future. So we'll stay tuned.
我很想在未来听到更多关于 Sams 如何转变成 Robinsons 的内容，所以我会持续关注。
Susan Patricia Griffith
I'll do that at some point, Josh. I did something called Imagine Diane, I want to say like in 2014 or -- I'm aging myself, we started thinking about that. And that's one of the reasons why we really started looking at the construct of the 3 horizons of different products that our customers need. John Sauerland, I remember, vividly did an IR presentation on we want people to come in if they say, do you have that product, do you have x product, life insurance, jewelry insurance, we can say, yes, we have that. Maybe not all of it will be on our paper but to be able to have that type of portfolio of products for every customer as their insurable need changes. And we could redo that because I'm sure some things change, we sort of would put them through like Diane is renter, then she gets engaged and she needs her ring insured and go on and on and we can tell you the likelihood of the PLE with that. But I'll put that on the list of a deep dive topic for our future, for sure. Thanks, Josh.
我会在未来某个时候讲解这个问题，Josh。我记得大概在 2014 年，我们做过一个叫“Imagine Diane”的研究——暴露年龄了（笑）。那时我们开始思考客户需要的不同产品“三个地平线”的构建。我清楚地记得 John Sauerland 曾在投资者关系的演讲中提到，我们希望当客户问“你们有没有某种产品，比如人寿险、珠宝险”时，我们都能回答“是的，我们有”。当然不一定所有产品都由 Progressive 自己承保，但我们希望能拥有一个完整的产品组合来满足客户不断变化的保险需求。我们可以重新做一次这样的研究，因为我相信情况已经发生了变化。比如 Diane 一开始是租房者，然后她订婚了，需要为戒指投保，然后不断往后推，我们可以推算出对应的 PLE 概率。但这肯定会列入我们未来的深度研究议题。谢谢你，Josh。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Gregory Peters of Raymond James.
下一个问题来自 Raymond James 的 Gregory Peters。
Charles Gregory Peters
I guess I'd like to go back to the pricing theory portion of the presentation. And during the -- and I understand it was a theory discussion, but you used a factor of 12% for LAE. And I don't -- I'm going to pick that LAE number as just sort of if you can give us some perspective of how LAE has trended for your business the last couple of years. And I guess more importantly, I'm sure you're using some technology to improve those costs relative to earned premium. Can you talk about what kind of leverage you have for further improvement in LAE as we look out the next 24 to 36 months?
我想回到演示文稿中的定价理论部分。我理解那是一个理论讨论，但你们用了 12% 的 LAE 比例。我就以这个数字为例，能否请你们谈谈过去几年 LAE 在你们业务中的趋势？更重要的是，我确信你们在利用一些技术手段来改善这些相对于已赚保费的成本。能否谈谈在未来 24 到 36 个月中，你们在进一步降低 LAE 方面还会有哪些手段和潜力？
Susan Patricia Griffith
I'll start that -- I'll start the answer. And then Brad, if you want to just talk about -- I think it was just used as a -- just as an example. But our LAE has reduced in the last 10 or 15 years consistently. As you saw this quarter, our NAER, which is our expense ratio outside of our acquisition costs, went down by about 0.3%. We will continue to push down costs across the board, not necessarily acquisition costs because we'll spend as much as we can to grow. But my team and I consistently talk about technology changes,
process changes, people changes, that we can do to continue to lower both our expense ratio actually across the board. That's really important to our customers to maintain those competitive prices. So I've been very happy with our reduction across the board, not just in LAE but in our expense ratio, overall NAER, I should say, in the last 10 years and we'll continue to focus on that. And we believe we have a lot of opportunity, especially with technology. And I think the 12% Brad used was an example but I'll let you elaborate on that, Brad.
我先回答这个问题。Brad 之后可以补充。我认为那个 12% 只是作为一个示例。实际上，在过去 10 到 15 年里，我们的 LAE 一直在下降。本季度你们也看到，我们的 NAER（不含获客成本的费用率）下降了大约 0.3%。我们会继续努力降低整体成本，不一定是获客成本，因为为了增长我们会尽可能多投入。但我和我的团队一直在探讨技术改进、流程改进、人员优化等方式，以便继续降低我们的费用率。这对客户来说非常重要，可以保持价格竞争力。过去 10 年中，不仅是 LAE，我们整体的 NAER 都在下降，我对此非常满意。我们会继续专注于这方面，并且相信特别是通过技术手段还有很大机会。我认为 Brad 用的 12% 只是一个示例，我让他来进一步说明。
Bradley Granger
Yes. Thanks, Tricia. Yes, the 12% was an example. It's actually considerably lower when you measure the cost of LAE in relation to premium. But to add to what Tricia said, we also are very careful to both look at his recent historic LAE performance but also to take a future forward-looking view of it to ensure that we are ahead of the curve for any changes, any efficiencies that the business creates.
是的，谢谢 Tricia。12% 的确只是一个示例。实际上，如果你把 LAE 成本相对于保费来衡量，这个比例要低得多。但补充 Tricia 的话，我们在分析时既会非常谨慎地关注最近的历史 LAE 表现，同时也会采取前瞻性的视角，确保我们能够走在前面，及时应对业务带来的任何变化和效率提升。
Charles Gregory Peters
Okay. I guess the other question I had, just as I was listening to the presentation and your comments about the rate cuts in Florida brought up a concept, and I'm not sure it's valid, so I thought I'd ask you for your opinion. Normally, when you get to price increases because of inflation and other factors, that can be disruptive to your retention ratios. And I'm curious if price decreases can also be disruptive to retention, triggering shopping. I'm curious about your perspectives on that.
好的。我还有另一个问题。在听演示和你们谈到佛罗里达降价时，我想到一个概念，不确定是否成立，所以想请你们发表看法。通常情况下，当因为通胀等因素导致涨价时，会对续保率造成冲击。我想知道，降价是否也可能对续保率造成冲击，导致客户比价？你们对此怎么看？
Susan Patricia Griffith
I think the shopping in the last's several years have been just so volatile because of changes, because of the extraordinary inflation that happened in 2023 and actually before then. Typically, when you have a price decrease, it wouldn't necessarily increase shopping, although it has a lot -- there's a lot of external things, too, in terms of advertising and other things that happen. So I wouldn't necessarily say that. I think there's a lot of different variables depending on also the speed of what's happened in the industry, which is what I think Jen talked about was, just responding quickly to get accurate rates is what we want to do. We spur on with -- with decreases, you're really typically adding on new business growth. And that's depending on if people are shopping their carrier or like I said, with ours, or people looking at a policy review to see if they can make changes in their policy to decrease their rates, if that makes sense.
我认为过去几年的客户比价非常波动，主要是因为变化频繁，尤其是 2023 年及之前出现的极端通胀。通常情况下，当你降价时，并不会必然导致客户比价增加。当然，外部因素很多，比如广告等，也可能带来影响。所以我不会这么绝对地说。我认为这要看行业中变化的速度，这也是 Jen 提到的，我们要快速响应，做到准确定价。降价通常会带来新增业务的增长。而这取决于客户是去比价换保险公司，还是像我刚才说的那样，只是做了一次保单审核，看看能否在现有保单上调整以降低费用。希望这样解释能让你理解。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Jimmy Bhullar of JPMorgan.
下一个问题来自摩根大通的 Jimmy Bhullar。
Jamminder Singh Bhullar
So just first had a question on how the -- you view the competitive environment to be in personal auto. And it seems like everybody's margins have improved. And in most cases, at the sort of upper end of their historical ranges. And more and more companies are talking about wanting to grow as opposed to improve margins. And just wondering if you've seen that in the competitive behavior overall and how that affects your view of margins and growth prospectively for Progressive?
我首先有一个关于个人汽车保险竞争环境的问题。看起来每家公司的利润率都有所改善，并且大多数情况下都处于其历史区间的高端。而且越来越多的公司谈到要追求增长，而不是进一步改善利润率。我想知道，你们是否在整体竞争行为中也看到了这一点？这又会如何影响你们对 Progressive 未来利润率和增长的看法？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. We definitely have seen the environment become more and more competitive. And we were thankful to get out ahead of the rates. And so we've been able to put on the amount of growth we put on in terms of policies in force. Like I said, comparisons will be difficult because you were comparing on incredible numbers in 2024. And frankly, incredible numbers, in the first half of 2025. That said, that's our sweet spot. We love that. We love the competitiveness. It's great for consumers. It's great just making all of us better. So our goal will remain to grow as fast as we can and make our target profit margin. We are doing great on both right now. I think I started in my letter talking about that in net premium written as our trifecta and we'll continue to do that. It's going to get more competitive. But again, that's what makes this business fun.
是的，我们确实看到竞争环境变得越来越激烈。我们很庆幸能够在费率方面抢先一步，这使我们能够实现保单在保数量上的增长。正如我之前所说，对比起来会比较困难，因为 2024 年的数据非常惊人，而 2025 年上半年同样如此。话虽如此，这正是我们的优势所在。我们喜欢竞争，这对消费者有利，也促使我们大家都变得更好。所以我们的目标仍然是尽可能快地增长，同时实现目标利润率。目前我们在这两方面都做得很好。我在信里开头就提到，我们把净承保保费作为“三连胜”的指标之一，并将继续这么做。竞争会越来越激烈，但这正是让这个行业有趣的地方。
Jamminder Singh Bhullar
Okay. And on an unrelated topic, what's your view on how -- like it's a gradual process but more and more cars becoming autonomous and just generally more technology-intensive with more sensors, cameras and stuff. How does that affect the TAM and the overall market opportunity for personal, auto companies over the next -- if you were to look forward, over the next 5 to 10 years or so?
好的，换一个不相关的话题。你怎么看待汽车逐渐变得更加自动化，整体上也更加技术密集，比如配备更多的传感器、摄像头等？这在未来 5 到 10 年会如何影响个人汽车保险公司的可寻址市场（TAM）和整体市场机会？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. We're actually doing that exercise right now. We've been doing that exercise for the last 10 or 15 years. I think the first time we talked about it in an Investor Relations call was 2013 and then again in 2017. So we're always looking out sort of this cone of uncertainty or certainty and we look at conservative, pessimistic, middle of the route. I will say we have -- even our most pessimistic view, we were way under. So we did not believe the addressable market would grow at the rate it has grown. So we continue to look at that. We're revising what we call runway right now to look at our addressable market. Of course, vehicle safety comes into play. And if you think about the ADAS systems that have come into play in the last 10 or 15, 20 years, yes, it reduces frequency. As you've seen, the frequency decline in the past 50 or 60 years continues but it's typically offset by severity. It takes a while for the severity to -- the cost to be actually acceptable by consumers. So it takes a while.
是的，我们现在正在进行这方面的研究。过去 10 到 15 年，我们一直在做这件事。我记得我们第一次在投资者关系电话中谈到这个话题是在 2013 年，然后是 2017 年。所以我们一直在关注所谓的不确定性或确定性的范围，我们会看保守、悲观、中间几种情境。我想说的是，即使在我们最悲观的预测中，我们也严重低估了市场的增长速度。我们并没有预料到可寻址市场会以这样的速度扩张。因此我们会继续关注，并正在修订我们所谓的“跑道”（runway）来重新评估市场空间。当然，车辆安全因素会起作用。如果你想到过去 10 到 20 年中 ADAS 系统的引入，确实降低了事故发生频率。过去 50 到 60 年事故率下降的趋势依然在继续，但通常会被事故严重程度上升所抵消。而严重程度的成本需要一段时间才能达到消费者可接受的水平，这需要时间。
In addition to that, when you think about technology and cars and the life span of cars, it's now up to about 13 years. So when you think about the addressable market, even as cars get safer, it does take a while for the fleet to grow into that system. And so we believe that, one, we think safer cars is great for society, and we want that to happen. It's really important. And so we're very -- we want that to happen. That said, it does take a while to -- for the severity trends to offset the frequency trends. So I guess what I'm trying to say is we think there's a lot addressable market to be had in the next 5 to 10 years. And especially as we diversified across all 3 horizons. And I had talked about before the opportunity around bundling more of that business, that auto, home bundle, we call our Robinsons.
此外，考虑到汽车技术和寿命，现在汽车的平均寿命大约是 13 年。因此即便汽车变得更安全，整个车队也需要时间来逐步进入新系统。所以我们认为，第一，更安全的汽车对社会是好事，我们希望看到这种趋势，这非常重要。因此我们非常希望它发生。话虽如此，严重程度趋势需要时间来抵消频率趋势。换句话说，我们认为在未来 5 到 10 年中仍然有很大的市场空间。特别是当我们在三个发展阶段（Horizons）全面布局时。我之前提到过，机会之一就是将更多业务打包销售，也就是我们所说的 auto + home 捆绑业务，即 Robinsons。
在英国农村几乎所有建筑都是几百年前的。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of David Motemaden of Evercore ISI.
下一个问题来自 Evercore ISI 的 David Motemaden。
David Kenneth Motemaden
Tricia, I'm just hoping to unpack a little bit just on the PLEs and their retention. Just how much is the mix dynamic versus how much is more just competition. So I was hoping maybe you could just talk about how retention looked by customer segment to kind of isolate -- take the mix dynamic out of it?
Tricia，我想进一步拆解一下关于 PLE 和客户留存的问题。到底有多少是业务组合（mix）变化带来的影响，又有多少是竞争导致的？我希望你能谈谈，不同客户细分群体的留存情况如何，从而把组合效应隔离出来？
Susan Patricia Griffith
We don't typically share that. I think it's -- I think shopping is a lot. Our customers shopping with us is more than it's ever been. It's -- I think it's slowing a little bit because I think things are getting more competitive. And then the mix is always going to influence it. I mean at some point, we could index it and show you a little bit of the difference. And maybe I think Josh had asked to talk about the Sams and future Robinsons, we could probably weave that into there because that's part of the formula. But we don't typically unpack all of that because even underneath every one of our segments, there's multiple ways we look at those segments depending on channel. Are they -- is it auto, home with an unaffiliated partner versus us? So it's -- there's a lot of detail in that.
我们通常不会披露这些数据。我认为主要还是“购物”（shopping）行为很多。客户在我们这里比以往任何时候都更频繁地比较和购物。我认为这种趋势最近有所放缓，因为市场竞争加剧了。至于组合（mix），它始终会产生影响。某些时候我们可以做一个指数化分析，展示一些差异。我记得 Josh 曾经提到 Sams 和未来 Robinsons 的话题，我们可能会把这部分也纳入进来，因为这是公式的一部分。但我们通常不会完全拆解这些数据，因为即使在我们每一个客户细分群体里，我们都会有不同的观察方式，这还取决于渠道，比如客户是否是通过无关联的合作伙伴购买 auto、home 保险，还是直接在我们这里。所以，这里面有很多细节。
David Kenneth Motemaden
Got it. No. Okay. That's helpful. And then maybe if I could just follow up. Just on the frequency. So that continues to come in pretty favorable. It's been almost 2 years now that we've been in negative territory. Could you just talk about if you're seeing any dynamic? It looks like first-party collision claims are down by more than property damage. Are you seeing any impact just from customers that might not be filing claims and sort of with the deductible, just sort of eating the claims? And I guess, I'm trying to just isolate how much is maybe that dynamic versus just greater penetration of ADAS and some of these collision avoidance systems that might also be putting downward pressure on frequency.
明白了，谢谢，这很有帮助。我再追问一下关于事故频率（frequency）。你们的频率表现仍然相当不错，到现在已经接近两年保持在负值区间了。你能谈谈你们看到的动态吗？看起来自有车辆的碰撞理赔下降幅度比财产损失更大。你们是否观察到有些客户因为免赔额（deductible）的关系而选择不报案，自行承担损失？我想弄清楚这其中有多少是这种行为的影响，又有多少是来自 ADAS 和其他碰撞避免系统更高渗透率带来的下行压力？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. I think -- I mean, it's hard -- collision and PD are always hard because there's the timing and subrogation and the different amounts that we pay, it depends -- and Jen had gone over that a little bit. Most of this has been our difference in mix and the continued vehicle miles traveled. And so we're watching that closely. We're seeing -- we continue to see that. So that's really where the majority of our frequency decline has been in.
是的，我认为——碰撞（collision）和财产损失（PD）一直很难分析，因为涉及时间点、代位求偿（subrogation）以及我们实际支付金额的差异，情况比较复杂——Jen 之前也稍微谈到过。大部分频率下降的原因，主要还是来自业务组合（mix）的变化，以及车辆行驶里程（VMT）的持续变化。这是我们重点关注的，我们也确实持续看到这种情况。这也是我们事故频率下降的主要原因所在。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Katie Sakys of Autonomous Research.
下一个问题来自 Autonomous Research 的 Katie Sakys。
Katie Sakys
First, I wanted to ask on the 16-month trend time that you guys used when thinking about the various factors and the pricing adequacy model. How has that time frame shifted coming out of the pandemic? Are you guys assuming slightly more months? Was it potentially higher in the past than it is now? And how might you expect that to trend going forward?
首先，我想问一下，你们在定价充足性模型中使用的 16 个月趋势期。在疫情之后，这个时间框架有发生变化吗？你们现在假设的月份是不是比以前稍微多一些？过去是否可能比现在更长？未来你们预计这一趋势会如何变化？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. I'll let Brad and/or Jen comment on that. But we do try to -- we try to be flexible depending on what's happening and what's needed in the current environment. And so if you guys want to add anything on that?
是的。我会让 Brad 和/或 Jen 来补充。但我们的确会尝试保持灵活，取决于当前环境下发生的情况和需要。所以如果你们想补充的话，可以加上。
Bradley Granger
Yes. Thanks, Tricia. I don't think it's changed that much. It's a function of as we talked about how far back you're looking in your data period. So our growth helps there. if we only have to look back 1 year instead of 2 years, you don't have to trend as far in the history to today. Also, as we pointed out, too, it's also a factor of how quickly you can do rate revisions, get them priced, get them filed, get them approved but also how many you can do. So the fact that we are able to increase our rate revision capacity quickly if we need to, helps to also reduce the number of months we have to trend into the future.
是的，谢谢 Tricia。我认为其实没有太大变化。它主要取决于我们在数据周期里往回看的时间跨度。我们的增长在这方面有帮助——如果我们只需要往回看 1 年，而不是 2 年，就不必把趋势从更久远的历史拉到今天。此外，正如我们之前指出的，这也取决于我们能多快完成费率调整：定价、申报、审批，以及我们能做多少次。所以我们能够在需要时快速提升费率调整的能力，这也有助于减少我们在未来必须预测的月份数。
Katie Sakys
That's helpful. And then perhaps as a follow-up, I know we spoke about Florida earlier in Q\&A but are there any other states where you may potentially have profits that are exceeding statutory limits and might have to consider issuing a refund to policyholders?
这很有帮助。作为一个跟进问题，我知道我们在 Q\&A 早些时候已经谈过 Florida。但在其他州，你们是否也可能出现利润超过法定上限的情况，从而需要考虑向保单持有人退款？
Susan Patricia Griffith
No, I don't think there's any other excess profit statutes other than Florida.
没有。我认为除了 Florida 之外，没有其他州有超额利润相关的法定规定。
Operator
Our next question comes from the line of Mike Zaremski of BMO.
下一个问题来自 BMO 的 Mike Zaremski。
Michael David Zaremski
In the letter, Tricia, you mentioned that the 8.9 product model and about 50% of your premiums is demonstrating favorable conversion results and elasticity. Any willingness to kind of unpack that a bit? I don't feel like we're seeing it in some of the 10-Q KPIs, although some of them do have tough comps. That's my first question.
在信里，Tricia，你提到 8.9 产品模型以及大约 50% 的保费正在展现出良好的转化结果和弹性。能否展开讲讲？我觉得在 10-Q 的一些关键指标里没太看到，虽然其中一些确实有比较难的同比基数。这是我的第一个问题。
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. I mean, I think every product model we look at, we have is very specific segmentation schematic in that and to grow and especially in the preferred business. Pat, if you want to comment on 8.9 in particular, because we're already on 9.0 \[indiscernible] thinking about 9.0 and our other ones. And it takes some while to, I think, build into it.
是的。我认为我们每一个产品模型都有非常具体的细分框架，尤其是在优选业务方面有助于增长。Pat，你是否想特别谈谈 8.9，因为我们已经在 9.0 上了 \[听不清]，也在考虑 9.0 和其他模型。我觉得需要一段时间才能完全体现出来。
Patrick K. Callahan
Yes. The only thing that I would add is there's a lot of moving parts as we elevate product models into states and we are taking rates either up or down when we simultaneously elevate the segmentation. So while we look in aggregate at what the contribution happens pre/post any model change, there's a lot of moving parts in market as well. But as Tricia mentioned, we recently elevated 9.0 in our first state and continue to bring new segmentation that we think better matches rate to risk to market and creates that adverse selection and more competitive prices for more consumers.
是的。我想补充的一点是，当我们把产品模型推向各州时，会有很多动态因素。因为我们在同时提升细分的过程中，费率可能会上调或下调。所以虽然我们会整体上看模型调整前后的贡献，但市场里也有很多变量。但正如 Tricia 提到的，我们最近已经在第一个州推出了 9.0，并且持续引入新的细分方式，我们认为这样可以更好地匹配风险与费率，使市场出现逆向选择，同时为更多消费者提供更有竞争力的价格。
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes.
是的。
John Peter Sauerland
Generally, I would add, as we bring on new product models, we're getting more and more competitive on the more preferred end of the spectrum and that is where our market share is lowest. So that creates greater runway for us in terms of growing share across the board, across those consumer marketing tiers.
总体上我想补充的是，随着我们推出新的产品模型，我们在优选端的竞争力越来越强，而这正是我们市场份额最低的地方。这为我们在所有消费者市场层级中扩大份额创造了更大的增长空间。
Susan Patricia Griffith
Yes. Well -- and lastly, we have our 5.0 property product model in about 75% of our net written premium in about 29 states. So that, along with the continued segmentation on the auto side, really gives us the ability to get those bundled customers. And I would say, with our current market share and our base of auto PIFs, we're just getting started.
是的。最后，我们的 5.0 财产产品模型已经覆盖约 29 个州，占大约 75% 的净承保保费。加上在汽车业务端持续推进的细分，这确实让我们有能力拿下更多捆绑客户。我会说，以我们当前的市场份额和汽车 PIF 基础来看，我们才刚刚开始。
Michael David Zaremski
That's helpful. And my last follow-up is just kind of seeing the \[indiscernible] on shopping levels. I think there were different comments made during this call previously. I just want to understand, are shopping levels still materially above kind of what you -- what Progressive would consider the normal long-term trend line? Or have they already kind of come down to closer to normal or maybe below given the softish kind of pricing environment?
这很有帮助。我的最后一个跟进问题是关于购物水平。我觉得在这次电话会议上之前有一些不同的说法。我想确认一下，目前的购物水平是否仍然显著高于 Progressive 所认为的长期正常趋势线？还是说，考虑到目前相对宽松的定价环境，它们已经回落接近正常甚至低于正常水平了？
Susan Patricia Griffith
I would say shopping levels are still high. Ambient shopping is still up and we would still consider this a hard market because people are still shopping. And that's -- we talked a little bit about that with our PLE. But yes, for now, shopping remains high.
我会说购物水平依然很高。整体购物活跃度仍然偏高，我们仍然认为这是一个硬市场，因为消费者依然在不断比较和切换。我们之前在谈到 PLE 时也提到过这一点。但是的，目前购物水平依然很高。
Michael David Zaremski
And just would shopping normalize just as long as incomes keep increasing and auto rates don't go back up to high singles? Is that how we should think about it, like it takes a couple of years to normalize?
那购物行为会不会恢复正常，只要收入持续上升、汽车费率不再回到高个位数增长？我们是否应该这样理解：大概需要几年时间才能恢复正常？
Susan Patricia Griffith
Typically, it has in the past. I don't know. It's easy to shop. So I don't know if the pandemic and subsequent events has forever changed shopping behavior. That will unfold as this next couple of years unfolds but that has been how it typically has worked in markets in the past.
过去通常是这样的。我不确定。因为现在购物很容易，所以我不确定疫情和随后发生的事件是否永久改变了购物行为。这将在未来几年逐步显现。但在过去的市场中，通常确实是这样运作的。
Douglas S. Constantine
That appears to have been our final question. So that concludes our event. \[indiscernible], I'll hand the call back over to you for the closing scripts.
看来这是我们最后一个问题了。本次活动到此结束。\[听不清]，我将把电话交还给你来做结束发言。
Operator
That concludes the Progressive Corporation's Second Quarter Investor Event. Information about a replay of the event will be available on the Investor Relations section of Progressive's website for next year. You may now disconnect.
这就结束了 Progressive Corporation 第二季度投资者活动。有关重播的信息将在明年 Progressive 公司官网的投资者关系部分提供。您现在可以断开连接。
热门主题
Recent Articles
1987-02-27 Warren Buffett's Letters to Berkshire Shareholders
Refer To：《1987-02-27 Warren Buffett's Letters to Berkshire Shareholders》。 To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.: Our gain in net worth during 1986 was $492.5 million, or 26.1%. Over the last 22 years (that is, since present management took ...2014-02-28 Warren Buffett's Letters to Berkshire Shareholders
Refer To：《2014-02-28 Warren Buffett's Letters to Berkshire Shareholders》。 To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.: Berkshire’s gain in net worth during 2013 was $34.2 billion. That gain was after our deducting $1.8 billion of charges – ...2015-02-27 Warren Buffett.Intrinsic Value
INTRINSIC VALUE 内在价值 Now let’s focus on a term that I mentioned earlier and that you will encounter in future annual reports. 现在让我们聚焦一个我此前提到、你在未来年度报告中也会遇到的术语。 Intrinsic value is an all-important concept that offers the only logical approach to ...2023-09-16 Satya Nadella.Why we need re-founders
Refer To：《Why we need re-founders》。 Chapter 1: Do you want to be CEO of Microsoft? 第1章：你想当 Microsoft 的 CEO 吗？ SATYA NADELLA: If you’d asked me even the day before or the hour before, I would have said, “Hey, there’s a chance, but I don’t know who was ...2024-03-13 Satya Nadella.AI, chip shortage, empathy, and poetry
Refer To：《Satya Nadella.AI, chip shortage, empathy, and poetry》。 Nicolai Tangen: Hi there. I’ve just had the most incredible experience of my life, having been allowed to interview Satya Nadella, the CEO of Microsoft, which is now the most valuable ...